Circumcision? Baptism? Difference?

[Carbon]

The spiritual blessings granted to us by now being found in Christ comes thru saving faith in Him, not thru the water baptism , and the Great Commission is directed to making disciples and baptizing them in the blessed Trinity, and its hard to disciple babies

Even us discipling adults dont get them saved. Unless you believe you have the power to give a dead sinner life? Who is to say one isn't regenerated as an infant, or one still in the womb, or at 2 or 3? Let's face it, we just dont know. @Arial gave a great explanation. Maybe reread it?

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/circumcision-baptism-difference.3337/post-129069

 

[Carbon]

The point was if baptism is a requirement for salvation...the bible would have spoken about it in detail.

As to the old Testaments guys...I would start with Heb 11 and then work backwards into the OT.

But the NT interprets the OT, not the other way around. It's very important to remember that.

 

[Carbon]

And another thing---. What has also been lost or grossly neglected is the understanding of and importance of covenant and covenant community. It becomes just a word to us, but it is everything. All the promises and forward motion of Redemption in history rest squarely on the covenant relationship God has with his people. It is our surety and our hope. Trusting God rests on covenant relationship.

So, when it is said that infant baptism places the babe in the covenant community, a vast number of Christians do not know what that means or the gravity of it.

The babies and children of parents who are in the covenant with God are not left outside of it in the cold. They are baptized into it in the same way that the circumcision of Jewish infants was a sign that they were members of that covenant community. The only adults that were circumcised were those after the covenant was formed (there must have been a loud human wailing and gnashing of teeth on that day! ) and any strangers who wanted to be a part of the covenant community. Same thing with the baptism of adults who are regenerated into faith

Amen. And only those who are united to Christ and who are members of his body have a right to present their children for baptism

 

[Carbon]

Baptism signifies union with Christ and membership in his body. It means this for both adults and infants. So in respect of efficacy, baptism is for infants precisely what it is for adults, namely, the divine testimony to their union with Christ and the divine certification and authentication of this great truth.

 

[Carbon]

Baptism signifies union with Christ and membership in his body. It means this for both adults and infants. So in respect of efficacy, baptism is for infants precisely what it is for adults, namely, the divine testimony to their union with Christ and the divine certification and authentication of this great truth.

Though infants are not capable of the intelligent exercise of faith , they are, nevertheless, susceptible to God’s efficacious grace in uniting them to Christ, in regenerating them by His Spirit, and in sprinkling them with the blood of Christ.

 

[Carbon]

Though infants are not capable of the intelligent exercise of faith , they are, nevertheless, susceptible to God’s efficacious grace in uniting them to Christ, in regenerating them by His Spirit, and in sprinkling them with the blood of Christ.

This grace, in the bonds of an everlasting covenant, infants may fully possess,

 

[Carbon]

This grace, in the bonds of an everlasting covenant, infants may fully possess,

This is what baptism signifies and seals, and no warrant can be elicited for the assumption that in respect of efficacy this sign or seal has any other effect in the case if infants than in the case of adults. (Murray)

 

[CrowCross]

But the NT interprets the OT, not the other way around. It's very important to remember that.

Not always.