MWicks wrote: The church building that we meet at burnt down just about 15 months ago. One of our elders said he was praying that our church would be on fire for the Lord, but this is not what he had in mind!
SteveR wrote: Jeremiah 10:3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. Jeremiah 10:4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not
Christmass? Really Steve, Roman Catholicism gave us Jeremiah 10:3,4 Christmass?
What, not halloween too? RC gave us that too? What's wrong with praying to the dead, that's the ALL SAINTS DAY? Right Steve.
Well the WCF cleverly plays both sides. That infant baptism saves, or maybe not.
It says the batized are saved
WCF wrote: Baptism is "to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life"
- they are regenrated/forgiven/ingrafted in Christ/to walk in newness of life with Christ.
That's a saved person!!!
But then again it's forced to concede they are baptizing unregenerates!
WCF wrote: But not " all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated".
Paedo's scripture references are of no help. Their sermons are filled with soppy tearjerkers of, "what about our children? whould God forget our children? doesn't He love em more in the new testament?" Lets baptize them all!
Does that help any serious look at the subject? No!
God has already given the parents the reponsibilty of bringing up children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. There's no call for any special magic water, just a call to dedicate all & in bringing up godly children.
SteveR wrote: SA has a crowd that believes that a Catholic once saved could never ever stay in the RCC, yet they believe the saved could do all these horrible acts. Is your idea really that the Spirit only controls what Church they attend?
You've got to be kidding! Are you sure you've read the bible and understood the born-again new regenerative nature of a believer?
Biliever can stumble in sin multiple times but will not remain in his sin because his new nature will not be comfortable to remain at odds with the Holy Spirt. We have grace and forgiveness for when we stumble.
As act of continual, habitual rebellious state of being, say like remaining in a satanist church, is not sign of regeneration.
objective wrote: "The children of believers are heirs of all the promises of the covenant....This is supported by four things:
Christ regards children as members of the covenant..in Matthew 19:13
Peter does this at Pentecost, Acts2:39 and Paul does it with the Philippian jailer, Acts16:31.
In 1Cor7:14, Paul affirms that the children of believers are holy." (Jason A. Van Bemmel)
1Cor7:14 says the unbelieving spouse is sanctified. And the children are already holy before baptism
If children of believers are heirs of the covenant, Mathew 19:13 Jesus says ALL children (as you point out) are already members of the covenant without baptism.
In Acts 2:39, Peter is calling circumcised and already covenanted people to now get baptised Oh no no no!! Acording to you, Jewish circumcisn was not valid!
Acts16:31 The Jailers household got saved. If you're right then no confession of faith was required except from one beliving jailer. Every believing & nonbeliving adult & child in that household recieved baptism without consent.
Appealing to historical practice is not "proof" that pedo is legitemate. It is legitemate if it was a practice esablished by God. This is what we contend.
There's no doubt that all kinds of pagan practices were rife even before the start of the Christian church. When the church started, paganism tried to come alongside and creep into the church. Look at Semiramus's babylonia, already present from before the time of the appostles, it lives on now via Romanism.
Some of the worst and most rapid corruptions were happening whithin the first 100 yrs.
Going back is not "proof". Proof is, that we have the true and pure form that was given by our Lord to His church.
Paganism always tried to override wherever it came into contact with Gods truth. It's true that Anabaptists look like a new upstart because they were the minority that wanted to keep to the truth against a widespread paganism that rode alongside some of the corrupted churches & could claimed that it had always been around!
We examine the bible to see what God had given His church to practise. The paedo's on the other hand do it backwords. They find people and groups in history with these pagan practices and find verses for it. That's why they don't ref the bible, or their verses look forced & out of place.
Matthew 19:29 "And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life"
objective wrote: Ge17:7,l0-11; Ro4:11: Mt28:19-20; Acts 2:38-39;10:47-48h Deutl0:16;30:6; Jer4:4; 9:25-26; Ez44:7,9;?Ro2:28-29 ?Baptism: Acts 2:38-39;22:16; Col2:11; Ga3:27,29;?1Pe3:21; Ti3:5-6 ?3. Ro4:11 ?Baptism: Mt3:13-17; Acts22:16 ?4. Deut10:16;30:6; Jer4:4;9:25-26; Acts15:1; Ro2:26-29; Col2:11-12. ---------- When a person believed God in the Old Testament, what happened? Ans: He was circumcised. What was the outward event representing the clean heart in the Old Testament? Ans: Circumcision. ?What was the outward sign that marked entry into the community of believers in the OT? Ans: Circumcision. Now replace the words "Old Testament" with "New Testament," asking the same questions: When a person believed God in the NT, what "happened? Ans: He was baptized. What was the outward event representing the clean heart in the NT? Ans: Baptism What was the outward sign that marked a person's entry into the community of believers in NT? Ans: Baptism.
None of those verses support infant baptism.
Why did Peter ask circumcised Jews to be bsptised. Why did they need both?
Wanted to get those points out of the way because Lurker's question is the one most pertinent to understanding why paedo baptism is senseless. If baptism is a one-to-one changeover from circumcisen then Lurker's question cannot be answered.
Don't look to Gal 3:28. That's talking about us meeting all the requirement of the law in Christ. There's no distinction, all are now sufficiently met in Christ. Exactly the opposite point of what you're making.
'There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ'.
1cor7:14 is talking about joining clean with the unclean - believer with unbrliever in marriage. It says the unbelieving spouse is sanctified otherwise the believer must leave that relationship. Why don't you baptise child and unbelieving spouse, the're both equally sanctified?
We belive in baptism as the lord commanded. You have the Jews that already in Abrahamic covernant through circumcisn recovenented. Unscritural!
yiu have to have circumcisn voided in acts 2:39. You cannot move withiout the establishment of that as your starting place. The debate to the Jerusalem coucil would never have been because its a no brainer.
ACTS 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call
Paedo's say see it says 'children'! It's talking about Abrahams promise. Had Peter STOPPED at 'children', this would have limited the scope of the promise and paedo's could have seen a specific call to action to a child. But Peter goes on, ' to all...far off ...as many as God calls'. This is the opening of the Gospel to all, no longer Just the Jews. 'Whosoever shall call shall be saved' V21 This is refering to Joel's prophesy V16,17. That in the last days, God will pour out His Spirit on Jew& Gentile.
Paedo's, in 2013 America, to an exclusively gentile audience, say we need to baptise to appropriate Abrahams promise. But ACTS 2:39 was spoken in Jerusalem where there were Jews, and lots of em, from all over the Empire V9,10. They and their children were already circumcised in Abrahams tradition. Imagine Peter telling them, 'oh, don't forget to baptise your children so ya all can appropriate Abrahams promise.' If paedo's are right, then Peter's telling them that their circumcision is void and a changeover to baptism happens. When & how? Were they ok yesterday?
Murdo P. wrote: 'Evangelicals and Catholics together' came about because Christians are panicking about losing the struggle to the secular side of society. With the church dying in numbers and doctrine ECT was an attempt by some to try to build upon a basis which hope, faith and love sought to overcome error with. Society gets worse and the future looks bleak, anything is worth a try and a united front might have had some good effect. Mans responsibility exists under a sovereign God.
MGT - Man & God Together. Equal partners beating back the secular world.
" For if one is saved, he remains so. If it remains to one saved to remember all sins, and be fortunate enough or be of sound mind enough, to confess the last one unconfessed before death, then salvation is of works, and not of grace, and up to the sinner, and not Christ"
There, need we say more.
Mike, don't forget your grumpy, ornery old grandpa whose too senile to confess it all. Ugly mean spiritedness is a sin and he'll die that way. To hell that he goes after retiring from the mission fields. Right?
Can you tell me what about suicide that lands you in hell? It all reduces to the last act for which you cannot confess of
Unconfessed sin that you do not have the opportunity to confess. That's all
I better be in good standing every moment lest I die suddenly. All people who die suddenly or through suicide end up in hell!