Christopher000 wrote: Steve, I didn't ignore your question at all. Read a few down where I answered your question in full. I had to look to see if the admins deleted it for some reason, but it's there. Starting with the Bible is a good idea. I have actually read it and listened to it many times over but never studied it. I'll do some research on Presbyterian. I'm trying to think of whether or not I've ever even seen one of their churches around here. I don't think so. Anyway, a giod church with other born again Christians around me is def something I need.
You don't need to research Preby. Just read what they post on here (inc. steveR) and you'll get a flavor of what they believe and more importantly how they believe these things without any scriptural justification. That should be enough.
Adv K wrote: .........For abundant proof of this, see Francis Nigel Lee's monograph titled Sprinkling is Scriptural. The antipaidobaptism of the Anabaptists strongly characterizes their Baptist stepchildren today" (F.N.Lee)
Ah, you mean another lying Presby who is now cured of his habit!
Christian Practice wrote: It is ordained of God in Scripture that Babies/infants, of Covenanted (Christian) parents, are to be baptised into church membership. "The main, argument for admitting the children of believers to a place in the visible church. It was done by divine appointment in the original organization of the church in the family of Abraham. The constitution of the church in this respect has never been changed. The privilege of children has not been withdrawn, nor the duty of parents revoked. The seed of the righteous, therefore, are still entitled to a place in the visible kingdom. The only escape from this argument is by denying the identity of the church under both dispensations. But this, as we have shown, cannot be maintained. The church of God is one -- one family of children -- one brotherhood of believers, in every age and country, whatever external modifications may have been made. Unless the children of pious parents have been debarred, therefore, they are yet within the household." (C.Hodge)
It is amazing what drivel can be spouted by folk indoctrinated into Presbyterianism. Not a shred of biblical proof. All mere assumptions!
Who was it that said that Presbys could never be accused of being Bereans?
Lurker wrote: ..To add to the confusion, Presby quotes the UNinspired writings of men.... "WCF 20/2. God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in anything contrary to his Word, or beside it, in matters of faith or worship." yet continues to label hymn singers as God rejectors. Apparently the conscience the WCF article speaks of is the Presby conscience (Real Christians) and the Baptist type conscience need not apply since they were first invented in 1521....
This may help - also from the WCF
"All synods or councils, since the apostles' times, whether general or particular, may err; and many have erred. Therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith, or practice; but to be used as a help in both."
"..we acknowledge.. that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed."
John UK wrote: ..in the Presby economy....all you have to do to make new Christians is - no, not go out as missionaries preaching the gospel at home or abroad - no, all you have to do is procreate as much as you can, and Lo, loadsa new Christian babies who will grow up thinking they're believers and become the future pastors and elders, which system will inevitably result in unregenerate folks getting into office, which thing will inevitably result in a falling away, until there is no Christian witness left in PresbyLand, when the Presby will naturally come back to Rome and be a grave upset to John Knox, who will inevitably be very annoyed at ever having listened to Mr Calvin and his Geneva Project, whereby religion is enforced and the poor children have H2O sprinkled all over their little faces, much to their upset, which inevitably leads to an unbalanced childhood, as they go about with their water pistols, trying to emulate their elders, baptising other little children as often as possible, much to the upset of their parents, who do not believe baptising the heathen kids, nor of preaching the gospel to them lest they repent and as non-covenant children come to attend their elite church and all.
The Bible Says wrote: "Since there is no explicit command to either baptize or withhold baptism from young children, interpretive prudence requires us to look for precedence in the previous covenant. ....
The previous covenant?! This begs the question whether there were any differences between the covenants and assumes that there were none. What utter tripe!
Biblical Practice wrote: Baptism of the 'seed' - The children of True Christians. "Take, in the next place, the important passage in I Cor. 7:14. "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband: else were your children unclean, but now are they holy." ...In this perplexity the apostle says, that the faith of one parent is sufficient to guaranty their covenant standing. They are not to be excluded. "On the maturest and most impartial consideration of this passage," says Doddridge, "I must judge it to refer to infant baptism." (Charles Hodge)
More ignorant rubbish from the Tripe pedlar. Hodge reads into the passage "the faith of one parent is sufficient to guaranty their covenant standing" and thinks that's okay. That's called Eisegesis!
shedding a little light wrote: Help for the poor Baptists.... Sacrament:- "Ecclesiastical . a visible sign of an inward grace, especially one of the solemn Christian rites considered to have been instituted by Jesus Christ to symbolize or confer grace: the sacraments of the Protestant churches are baptism and the Lord's Supper;" No wonder they have difficulties understanding the Old Testament. "WCF 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" a. Mat 28:19. â€¢ b. 1 Cor 12:13. â€¢ c. Rom 4:11 with Col 2:11-12. â€¢ d. Rom 6:5; Gal 3:27. â€¢ e. Titus 3:5. â€¢ f. Mark 1:4. â€¢ g. Rom 6:3-4. â€¢ h. Mat 28:19-20.
Didactic wrote: "Is Infant Baptism Protestant? In short, yes. All the Protestant Reformers including Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli and John Calvin held to infant baptism. Though these three great Protestants disagreed on many things, they all agreed on the Protestant doctrine of justification by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. They also agreed that infant baptism is a biblical practice and the best expression of the Protestant gospel. In fact, infant baptism has been the practice of the historic Christian church since the Apostolic period" (R.S.Clark) Baptism as a Sign and Seal of Covenant of Grace Life in God's Covenant Beginning with Baptism The Covenant of Baptism
Bit of a give away when an allegedly biblical tenet has to be supported by outright lies.
SteveR wrote: Would associating with unrepented sinners impact your spiritual life? What would your Pastor think if he saw your FB page full of sodomites, paedophiles and druggies? Would he nominate you for a Church leadership position? How about leading a youth Sunday School class?
I am surprised at your tone when speaking of sodomites, paedophiles and druggies? What about the elect among them? How dare you speak against the elect of God, you hateful bully!