Christian Baptism, does it include infants?

[Red Baker]

Thanks for your opinion. Just about your whole argument is based on your opinion.

Greetings Carbon~I'll answer this post and the one above this one before answering any more post from anyone. I have always made it a very conscience effort of answering all posts to me, so, give me time and I will answer yours. All who post here is based upon their opinion/understanding, including you. The one who uses the scriptures only should be the closest to the truth, so let us see who this may be.

I'm going to be blunt, and I mean no disrespect. I firmly believe you have a very shallow understanding of the Lord's Supper and Baptism

I have study both subject for many years, and have debated baptism for almost fifty years, but never have debated the subject of infant baptism, that I can recalled, but as I said above, I'm willing to do so~in the spirit of love for the brethren who may disagree with my understanding.

I do not get offended very easily, be as firm and dogmatic as you believe you need to be. The Pharisees were easily to be offended, Christ was never offended, for he had no reason to be. If I get offended over what folk say to me, then I have a problem that needs to be corrected.

you haven't given my posts any real consideration, but you said you would.

Carbon, I have read every single post that has been posted thus far, including your very carefully, some more than once~God being my witness.

So, from here on out, dont expect me to be very detailed with you on the subjects, until you actually study the subject. If you do study it and acquire a better understanding, I will be happy to get more involved. But Iw ill not spend all my time trying to help you understand each detail.

I do not need anyone to help me understand every detail, I labor to do that myself. You post and I will consider all you have to say, but do not get upset with me for not agreeing with you, that does no one any good to agree to disagree. But, in my disagreement, I will be do as you said in the OP~I will respectfully disagree and not allow any disagreement come in between me and the person I disagree with. I have always practiced this, Jim is my witness.

Tomorrow I will address your other post to me ~the Lord willing, and the creek does not rise, as the old saying goes.

 

[atpollard]

I’m not sure why you would include this passage?

Thanks

It points to the PURPOSE of Baptism (as did the pairing of Baptized and Holy Spirit in other verses he quoted).
[Sort of a Baptist 101 view of scripture and Baptism and why Credo vs Paedo tugs at the very definitions of CHURCH and BAPTISM … making it easy for Christians to talk past each other in these discussions.]

Did the baby receive the Holy Spirit as part of its salvation, then why is it being Baptized if baptism is liked to that event? (Just verbalizing the implied argument from the posted scripture in Acts 10:44-47).

 

[Simons]

I’m not sure why you would include this passage?

Thanks

I included it simply because it is part of the "Cornelius’ household" story where both "household" and baptism are mentioned.
The significant bits are: Peter will bring a message through which all of Cornelius' household will be saved =>all who heard received the Holy Spirit =>since they received the Holy Spirit they should be baptized with water.

IMHO newborns can hear, but I don't think it is proper to say that they "heard the message".

One "household" verse that I haven't included (because it doesn't mention baptism in the passage is John 4:53 : Then the father realized that this was the exact time at which Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live.” So he and his whole household believed.

 

[Carbon]

I included it simply because it is part of the "Cornelius’ household" story where both "household" and baptism are mentioned.
The significant bits are: Peter will bring a message through which all of Cornelius' household will be saved =>all who heard received the Holy Spirit =>since they received the Holy Spirit they should be baptized with water.

IMHO newborns can hear, but I don't think it is proper to say that they "heard the message".

One "household" verse that I haven't included (because it doesn't mention baptism in the passage is John 4:53 : Then the father realized that this was the exact time at which Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live.” So he and his whole household believed.

Okay.

looks like I won't have the time today, I had bible study tonight. But I am looking forward to this discussion. I will try again tomorrow evening.

 

[Red Baker]

Thanks for your opinion. Just about your whole argument is based on your opinion. I'm going to be blunt, and I mean no disrespect. I firmly believe you have a very shallow understanding of the Lord's Supper and Baptism, and you haven't given my posts any real consideration, but you said you would. I am debating your opinion, there is no debt on these subjects. So, from here on out, dont expect me to be very detailed with you on the subjects, until you actually study the subject. If you do study it and acquire a better understanding, I will be happy to get more involved. But Iw ill not spend all my time trying to help you understand each detail.

One more thought on this before moving to your other post.

As I mentioned above, I have never debated the subject of infant baptism, and the reason why I believe is this;

I grew up in Winston-Salem, N.C. moved even farther south to Greenville, S.C. around 1972 and came to Christ around two years later. In the south, there were very few churches who taught infant baptism, looking back, there was only one or maybe two Catholics churches in Greenville, with a few more Presbyterian churches, and Methodist churches~ with Baptist churches on just about every corner~We fought different battles over the years, during which time I did I read and consider how men like Luther, Calvin and Jonathan Edwards could believe in such doctrine as infant baptism, men who were so much smarter, and godly without question than I could ever dream to be. I came to understand where they came from and probably why they believe as they did, (from my personal perspective) and just accepted the fact that even great men are not always wise, (Job 32:9, speaking of age, yet also great in ability) they too can be in error and we must be careful as much as lies within us to stay with God's word.

I did visit the Antipedo Baptist Church of Georgetown, South Carolina back around twenty years ago to read about their history. There is now a museum there and one can go into one of the building on church grounds and read up on the Antipedo Baptist churches that settle here from Maine to S.C. from persecution of the church of England. It was indeed very interesting, I spent the greater part of a day there.

The Antipedo Baptists of Georgetown County, South Carolina, 1710-2010 in SearchWorks catalog

Stanford Libraries' official online search tool for books, media, journals, databases, government documents and more.

searchworks.stanford.edu

 

[Red Baker]

Again, why was Jesus baptized?

A fair question~one that may have layers of scriptural reasons, but we will give our honest and best effort.

I have considered others opinion/understanding, and they are all over the place with their answers, so, I do not think I have all the answers as to why, and I am willing to keep my mind open to another brother's understanding.

I looked at Calvin's opinion, and with all due respect to him, he skipped over this verse, at least in Matthew 3 commentary. Maybe he did address this point somewhere in his writings, that I do not know. It is better to skip over something with out purposing defending one's agenda.

Matthew 3:15​

“And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.”

The only reason given by our Lord is here shown to us by himself~for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.”

Brother, this reason, as I said, may have more than one layer to it~but here is the best I can do.

We both know that Our Lord did not need to be baptized for any personal reason for him to fulfill any righteousness on his own that he owed unto God~as we do~which is to give to God an answer of a good, and sincere conscience, based on our faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ, with a commitment to heed and follow the teachings/doctrines of the kingdom of God. per 1st Peter 3:21.

"for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness"~For, here means "because of" ~ Jesus was baptized because of, through his baptism, it reveals to all who witness a baptism that the righteousness of God is seen in water baptism concerning how this righteousness was secured for his people. It is through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which baptism so beautifully shows forth. Water baptism speaks to the eyes what the gospel does to the ears!

Brother, Jesus' baptism reveals too much for those who teach sprinkling as a mode of baptism. Baptism is by immersion only based on our Lord's baptism. Immersion shows the Lord's death and resurrection from the dead perfectly, this sprinkling cannot do.

Matthew 3:16​

“And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:”

This is too clear on the mode of water baptism to even reasonably debate it. The righteousness' of God revealed in the gospel of Jesus Christ, demands his spotless life, death, and resurrection from the dead, only immersion in water which our Lord submitted to, teaches this great truth to our eyes. Sprinkling denies the gospel's record of the holy scriptures.

I'm sure more will be said on this point, but enough for now.

Maybe not in your church.

Carbon, look at any definition concerning the meaning of sacrament. If the scripture uses the word, than no problem, but as used by most religious folks it is just as I said above. That being being said, I would not divide with another brother over them using the word, but I will not.

You have no legitimate argument here. Baptism replaces circumcision. I thought you said you consider others' beliefs.

I want to come back to this, keep from this post being too long. One word, just because I disagree, does not mean I have not consider another view.

 

[Eleanor]

Again, why was Jesus baptized?

To fulfill all righteousness.

 

[Carbon]

To fulfill all righteousness.

Exactly!

Thank you

 

[Carbon]

A fair question~one that may have layers of scriptural reasons, but we will give our honest and best effort.

I have considered others opinion/understanding, and they are all over the place with their answers, so, I do not think I have all the answers as to why, and I am willing to keep my mind open to another brother's understanding.

I looked at Calvin's opinion, and with all due respect to him, he skipped over this verse, at least in Matthew 3 commentary. Maybe he did address this point somewhere in his writings, that I do not know. It is better to skip over something with out purposing defending one's agenda.

Matthew 3:15​

“And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.”

The only reason given by our Lord is here shown to us by himself~for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.”

Brother, this reason, as I said, may have more than one layer to it~but here is the best I can do.

We both know that Our Lord did not need to be baptized for any personal reason for him to fulfill any righteousness on his own that he owed unto God~as we do~which is to give to God an answer of a good, and sincere conscience, based on our faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ, with a commitment to heed and follow the teachings/doctrines of the kingdom of God. per 1st Peter 3:21.

"for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness"~For, here means "because of" ~ Jesus was baptized because of, through his baptism, it reveals to all who witness a baptism that the righteousness of God is seen in water baptism concerning how this righteousness was secured for his people. It is through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which baptism so beautifully shows forth. Water baptism speaks to the eyes what the gospel does to the ears!

Brother, Jesus' baptism reveals too much for those who teach sprinkling as a mode of baptism. Baptism is by immersion only based on our Lord's baptism. Immersion shows the Lord's death and resurrection from the dead perfectly, this sprinkling cannot do.

Matthew 3:16​

“And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:”

This is too clear on the mode of water baptism to even reasonably debate it. The righteousness' of God revealed in the gospel of Jesus Christ, demands his spotless life, death, and resurrection from the dead, only immersion in water which our Lord submitted to, teaches this great truth to our eyes. Sprinkling denies the gospel's record of the holy scriptures.

I'm sure more will be said on this point, but enough for now.


Carbon, look at any definition concerning the meaning of sacrament. If the scripture uses the word, than no problem, but as used by most religious folks it is just as I said above. That being being said, I would not divide with another brother over them using the word, but I will not.


I want to come back to this, keep from this post being too long. One word, just because I disagree, does not mean I have not consider another view.

I have nothing more to say on this subject at this time. Now it's just talking over the same things over and over.

 

[Red Baker]

To fulfill all righteousness.

Greetings Eleanor, your post statement is a given, but you never attempted to tell us what does it mean by our Lord saying; "for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness"~I at least made a serious, and honest attempt to provide Carbon and other readers a sense to Jesus' response to John the Baptist's statement.

Matthew 3:14​

“But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?”

I said:

"for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness"~For, here means "because of" ~ Jesus was baptized because of, through his baptism, it reveals to all who witness a baptism that the righteousness of God is seen in water baptism concerning how this righteousness was secured for his people. It is through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which baptism so beautifully shows forth. Water baptism speaks to the eyes what the gospel does to the ears!

I would you or Carbon to at least address this.

A verse that would flow with this statement of Jesus is found here:

1st Peter 3:21​

“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:” Which water baptism shows so beautifully.

Let's keep this thread going. There other points I would love to discuss for all of our growth in the knowledge of the truth. I have not even got to the subject of baptism replacing circumcision, which I want to consider.

I'm leaving to go out of town be back tomorrow.

 

[Eleanor]

Greetings Eleanor, your post statement is a given, but you never attempted to tell us what does it mean by our Lord saying; "for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness"~I at least made a serious, and honest attempt to provide Carbon and other readers a sense to Jesus' response to John the Baptist's statement.

Well, for starters he was agreeing that he was our guarantee and payment for sin, with death thereby his due.
And we also have the Holy Spirit anointing him for his priestly work of removing sin (Ac 10:28), where washing was required in the ordination of priests (Ex 40:12).
His baptism indicated
1) he was consecrated to God, and the descent of the Holy Spirit showed God's official approval of him (Mt 3:16-17) as fulfilling all righteousness, as well as
2) Jesus identifying himself with man's sin, becoming our substitute and saving us from death as the ark saved those therein through water.

Matthew 3:14​

“But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?”
I said:
I would you or Carbon to at least address this.

A verse that would flow with this statement of Jesus is found here:

1st Peter 3:21​

“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:” Which water baptism shows so beautifully.

1 Pe 3:21 - "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not removal of dirt from the body but the pledge (response) of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Christ."

Baptism is a commitment on the part of the believer in all good conscience to make sure that what baptism symbolizes will become a reality in his life. People are saved, not by any ritual, but by the supernatural power of the resurrection through faith.

Let's keep this thread going. There other points I would love to discuss for all of our growth in the knowledge of the truth. I have not even got to the subject of
baptism replacing circumcision, which I want to consider.

"Replacing" is a bit strong. . .baptism "corresponds" to circumcision.

 

[Alive]

Replacing" is a bit strong. . .baptism "corresponds" to circumcision.

I agree totally it is not a replacement.
Circumcising was a unique physical change in just men that set Israel apart from the nations.
I have thoughts about why God chose this cutting away, but for another topic.
Baptism is not an outward physical sign at all. Shortly after the Lord regenerated me, brothers took me to a lake. As soon as I dried off, any evidence was gone.
What has remained is what it signified and the reality of dying and being raised in New Life and the very real results of that very real change…a New Man.

 

[Eleanor]

I agree totally it is not a replacement.
Circumcising was a unique physical change in just men that set Israel apart from the nations.
I have thoughts about why God chose this cutting away, but for another topic.

There was no life without first the shedding of blood.

Baptism is not an outward physical sign at all. Shortly after the Lord regenerated me, brothers took me to a lake. As soon as I dried off, any evidence was gone.
What has remained is what it signified and the reality of dying and being raised in New Life and the very real results of that very real change…a New Man.

???

 

[Red Baker]

Greetings Eleanor, your post statement is a given, but you never attempted to tell us what does it mean by our Lord saying; "for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness"~I at least made a serious, and honest attempt to provide Carbon and other readers a sense to Jesus' response to John the Baptist's statement.

Matthew 3:14​

“But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?”

I said:


I would you or Carbon to at least address this.

A verse that would flow with this statement of Jesus is found here:

1st Peter 3:21​

“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:” Which water baptism shows so beautifully.

Let's keep this thread going. There other points I would love to discuss for all of our growth in the knowledge of the truth. I have not even got to the subject of baptism replacing circumcision, which I want to consider.

I'm leaving to go out of town be back tomorrow.

Thank you Eleanor, I'll read this again carefully after a brief meeting this morning.

 

[Red Baker]

Baptism is not an outward physical sign at all.

Alive, what do you mean by this statement?

Shortly after the Lord regenerated me

Brother, no man knows the hour in which regeneration took place, this would ne impossible. There could be days, even months, maybe even longer, before true evidence is seen. We may get close to the season in which we begin to be willing to listen with a purpose of changing our life, but he exact time is hidden from us. I know this may open up a new can of worms.

Your other words was a good testimony.

As soon as I dried off, any evidence was gone. What has remained is what it signified and the reality of dying and being raised in New Life and the very real results of that very real change…a New Man.

Praise God.

 

[JIM]

Brother, no man knows the hour in which regeneration took place, this would ne impossible.

If you really knew what is meant by and what God accomplishes with "born of water and Spirit" then you would know the hour in which you were regenerated.

It is inconceivable that one could have been dead in his trespasses and sins and then made alive to walk in the newness of life as one who is now justified, regenerated and (at least initially) sanctified and not know it. Could God really be so cruel as to let that happen? Absolutely not!!

 

[Alive]

Brother, no man knows the hour in which regeneration took place, this would ne impossible. There could be days, even months, maybe even longer, before true evidence is seen. We may get close to the season in which we begin to be willing to listen with a purpose of changing our life, but he exact time is hidden from us. I know this may open up a new can of worms.

I may respond to this later. I know when because the Lord spoke to me in that moment.

 

[David1701]

...
Brother, no man knows the hour in which regeneration took place, this would ne impossible. There could be days, even months, maybe even longer, before true evidence is seen. We may get close to the season in which we begin to be willing to listen with a purpose of changing our life, but he exact time is hidden from us. I know this may open up a new can of worms.

...

This is a very concerning response, Red Baker.

When one is regenerated (i.e. born again), it is like being hit by lorry. To change similes, it is like a bright light being switched on inside you, where previously there was only darkness. There is godly sorrow, repentance and faith in Jesus Christ and the cross, and the joy of sins forgiven, where previously there was only doubt, guilt and unbelief. There is powerful love for the Lord, which, a moment before, had not been there.

Charles Wesley describes it perfectly (I'm not a Wesleyan, but the following verse of his hymn is excellent).

And Can it Be (verse 4)

"Long my imprisoned spirit lay
Fast bound in sin and nature's night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray,
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free;
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee."

If no-one notices the "change", then there was no change.

 

[Alive]

This is a very concerning response, Red Baker.

When one is regenerated (i.e. born again), it is like being hit by lorry. To change similes, it is like a bright light being switched on inside you, where previously there was only darkness. There is godly sorrow, repentance and faith in Jesus Christ and the cross, and the joy of sins forgiven, where previously there was only doubt, guilt and unbelief. There is powerful love for the Lord, which, a moment before, had not been there.

Charles Wesley describes it perfectly (I'm not a Wesleyan, but the following verse of his hymn is excellent).

And Can it Be (verse 4)

"Long my imprisoned spirit lay
Fast bound in sin and nature's night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray,
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free;
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee."

If no-one notices the "change", then there was no change.

Exactly my experience. The change and repentance was immediate and profound. The Joy and lifting of sins weight was palpable and resulted in immediate changes.
I will share more later when I am at my desk.

 

[Alive]

This is the testimony I was Graced with many years ago.

I am the way, the truth and the life and none can come to the Father but by me.

That is the first scripture I heard resound in my heart. I was 18 years old and a seeker. I was studying eastern religions and such things. One day while standing outside waiting for a ride, I found myself looking up to heaven and crying out--"God, whoever you are, I want to be aligned with truth".
A couple minutes later a guy I knew from our HS came walking down the sidewalk toward me. He invited me over the next night to play guitars and sing songs. I did to find out it was a bible study--a bunch of Jesus Freaks. LOL
John was my friend's name--he read the above scripture and I heard the Lord speak to me as audible and clear as can be--"I am the Truth". I was in that moment a New Man and everything changed. I was granted repentance. I began to devour scripture and to preach Christ in parks and street corners. My old friends thought I was nutz and worse when I gave away a bunch of money made selling drugs.

Everything changed and many things followed.

Before the Father placed me into Christ as a free gift by His Grace---I was like every other sinner member of Adam's fallen race of men.
This is a fact of history. There was nothing in me of righteousness.
In one moment, Christ spoke to me and said, "I am the Truth". In that moment, He put faith in my heart to believe Him.
This too, is a fact of history. It happened.
Miraculously, in that same moment, the Father placed me 'into' Christ and at that moment everything that the Father accomplished 'In Christ' on the cross, the resurrection and the ascension became true of and for me, as well.

He relocated me from the 1st Adam to the 2nd Adam. How could I possibly have accomplished this on my own?

John 1:13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

That moment was my Damascus. Every one born from above had the same experience.