My faith: Josiah (CaliforniaJosiah)

Some quick observations on BAPTISM


1. There are NO age statements in Scripture about baptism. NOTHING that says one must first attain a certain age - or not.


2. I think there is much that can go wrong when we turn associations into prerequisites, or confuse the word "and" with the word "then." In all the baptism texts, not once does any of the 3 words that mean "then" are used. We need to be respectful to the texts. Much goes wrong when people insert sequence or chronological order into texts that just don't state it.


3. I think much depends on whether one's theology is "arrow down" or "arrow up" - is it about what we do for God (ordinances, hoops) or what God does for us (grace, mercy, blessings, gifts). And when it comes to the issue of baptism as a "Means of Grace" whether we are monergists (who believe God GIVES faith, life, justification) or a synergist (God OFFERS faith, life, justification). Since Scripture does not "answer" a lot of our questions, the fundamental views we have about theology tend to get employed.


4. I think there are verses that suggest that Baptism does something and none that suggest it is just an obedient response to the Law. See Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, 1 Corinthians 6:11, 1 Corinthians 12:13, Galatians 3:26-27, Ephesians 5:25-27, Titus 3:5, 1 Peter 3:18-22.


5. While there is no verse that specifically states that infants were OR WERE NOT baptized, I'm not sure I agree that the norm is not what Scripture says but rather the examples of stuff we see done in the Bible (in other words, what MAY or MAY NOT have been DONE is not authoritative or normative). Many will say, "Every example of baptism that happens to be recorded in the Bible is of one over the age of ____" To which my reply is, "so what?" And of course, it's not provable (see 1 Corinthians 1:16, Acts 16:15, etc., etc. where "whole households" were baptized; we have NO CLUE as to what age all were in the "household."


6. Some note the very INCLUSIVE language associated with the Sacrament (Matthew 28:19, Acts 2:38-39, Acts 16:15, etc.) and the promise that children can believe (Matthew 18:6, Mark 10:13-15, etc.). The Early Church Fathers also testify of the very early practice of infant baptism. Polycarp (69-155 AD), a disciple of St. John, states that he was baptized as an infant. Justin Martyr (100-166) states in 150 AD that Baptism replaces circumcision and should be given to infants. Irenaeus (130-200) in “Against Heresies” states that baptism is “given to infants, children, youth and the elderly.” The Council of Carthage (254 AD) which involved 99 Christian bishops, stated “We ought not hinder any person from Baptism and the grace of God, including infants and the newly born.” The idea of restricting and forbidding this to those under a certain (never disclosed) age was not a teaching until the Anabaptist movement of the 16th Century.


My perspective....


- Josiah

Fathers on Infant Baptism

Irenaeus

"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment34 [A.D. 190]).



Hippolytus

"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).



Origen

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).



Cyprian of Carthage

"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

"If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another" (ibid., 64:5).



Gregory of Nazianz

"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]).

"‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28).



John Chrysostom

"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).



Augustine

"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).



Council of Carthage V

"Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).



Council of Mileum II

"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).

What does GOD say about the "L" of TULIP?


1 John 2:2, "Jesus is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."
OURS.... and not ONLY ours.... ALSO for the sins of "the whole world" NOT, "For a small part of the world."


Hebrews 2:9 "....Jesus tasted death for everyone."
EVERYONE.... not "just for a few"


1 Timothy 4:10 "...For Christ is the Savior of all people, especially those who believe."
Not "of only a few people but not most." "Especially for those who believe" because via faith, it is received by the individual (subjective justification).


Isaiah 53:6, "... and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all"
This prophecy is of Jesus... for those who have sin, Jesus died. For all of them. NOT "Not for all but only, exclusively, solely, just for a limited few."


John 4:42, ".... for Jesus is indeed the Savior of the world."
World. Not "of a tiny few who happen to be in the world." The verse makes no sense at all if it means only "the chosen" since the woman saying this was not a Jew and thus would not understand herself as chosen.


2 Corinthians 5:14-15, "That one had died for all.... that one has died for all."
Not "NOT for all but only, solely, exclusively, just for a limited FEW."


1 Timothy 4:6, "Who gave Himself as a random for all."
NOT, "Not for all but only, exclusively, solely, just for a limited few - and odds are, that's not you."


John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son .... whosoever believes....."
NOT, "For God so loved only, exclusively, solely, just a tiny few who happen to be in the world....." NOT "whosoever believes but ONLY if Jesus actually died for them which He probably didn't."


And so many, many more...


Now.... for 400 + years, radical Calvinists have been "spinning" these with perhaps the most radical eisegesis possible, spinning them to say the exact opposite of what these many verses say....

And for 400 + years, radical Calvinists have been asked for a verse.... even just one.... anywhere.... that states that Jesus died for ONLY a few. But in 400 + years, not one of them has been able to find any such verse. Nothing. Not one. All they can do is quote a verse and INSERT the word "only" into it so as to reverse what it says.


So.... we have SO many verses that specifically say Jesus died for "everyone" "the whole world" "all" but not one verse that says that's not true, Jesus died ONLY for a few.



So much for the "L" of TULIP, that Jesus died ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY, JUST for a LIMITED few.

Just a few Scriptures that contradict "Limited Atonement" (Jesus did NOT die for all but for ONLY AN UNNAMED FEW..... God desires most people to go to hell).


Here's just a few of the Scriptures that teach the opposite of your dogma:


First John 2:2 "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world Whole world.


Hebrews 2:9 "by the grace of God he tasted death for everyone. Everyone


1 Timothy 4:10 "we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe. All people.


John 4:42 "we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.” The world.


2 Corinthians 5:15 "he died for all" All




Hebrews 2:9 "namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. Everyone.


1 Timothy 2:4 "God desires all people to be saved." All


Titus 2:11 "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people." All people


2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish


Affirmed by John Calvin: “Since no man is excluded from calling upon God the gate of salvation is open to all. There is nothing else to hinder us from entering, but our own unbelief.”

Just a few.... And note, not just one. Not just from one biblical book or author.



.

Predestination/Election


Some Scriptures:

Ephesians 1:3-7
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace."

2 Thessalonians 2:13
"But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth."

Acts 13:48
"And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed."

Romans 8:29-30
"For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified."

2 Timothy 1:9
"Who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began."

Matthew 24:22-24
"And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect."

Others....
Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:20,22,27; Luke 18:7; Romans 8:33; Colossians 3:12; 1 Timothy 5:21; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1, etc., etc.


Some Notes:


1. Lutherans understand this as an aspect of JUSTIFICATION (in the narrow sense), not in the philosophical sense of everything being predetermined. Because of this, Lutherans often avoid the word "predestination" (a philosophical word) and use the term "Election" (although both are used interchangeably in Scripture).


2. Some confuse foreknowledge with predestination. They are not the same thing. Foreknowledge means to KNOW something before it happens. Predestination means to CAUSE it to happen. An illustration: I have foreknowledge (in MY case, imperfectly) that the sun will come up tomorrow. But I have nothing to do with it and do not cause it. They speak of two entirely different things.


3. As a Lutheran, I believe that there is mystery in soteriology (which is why Lutherans tend to stay out of the Arminianist/Calvinist fight). The exact interplay of faith and grace, the exact dynamics in HOW God saves us is simply not defined in Scripture - and thus we leave it as mystery. The bottom line is this: GOD is the Savior, not us. And we are justified by God's grace in Christ through our faith, which is the gift of God. THAT we affirm with passion! BTW, Lutherans tend to define "grace" here in a typically Protestant rather than Catholic manner, as God's undeserved, unmerited love, mercy and blessing, as getting what we don't deserve or earn; we don't define it as a "juice" God imputes in us that makes us able to do what we would not otherwise.


4. While Calvinist apply election to God's grace, Lutherans join with historic Christianity and apply it to faith. God predestines who will be granted the divine gift of faith, not whom God will love or for whom Christ will die. More on the difference between Lutheran and Calvinist ideas here: Why Lutheran Predestination isnt Calvinist Predestination | Mathew Block


5. There are two purposes/functions of this teaching.

A. Lutherans understand "predestination" (election) as GOSPEL. For Lutherans, whether something is Law or Gospel is key to understanding it, and we see this as Gospel. It is meant to comfort and assure BELIEVERS; it is not meant to be a 'terror of the conscience.' Let me use this illustration (however flawed). I was "born" by C-section because I had a severe (and potentially fatal) heart problem that needed immediate surgery; for sometime after my birth (and before my second surgery), I was quite limited in size and activities. Anyway, I SO VIVIDLY recall that when I was a little boy, I LOVED when my mother would tell me about before I was born. She told me how very much she loved me and how she prayed constantly for me. She told me how Dad traded in his beloved sports car for a station wagon, and gave up his office at home so it could be converted into a nursery for me (remember - the chances of me living were poor). They told me that the day of my birth and first surgery, my bother and sister both prayed out loud for me (I'd remember that when I had a fight with them!). And many friends, relatives and people from the church were at the hospital (some distance away since I was born at a children's teaching hospital affiliated with a university). Our pastor was there. Mom stressed to me how much I was loved EVEN BEFORE I WAS BORN. How much Mom and Dad wanted me, how much they did for me, the sacrifices they made for me. And they didn't know I would be such a smart, great, incredibly handsome guy. They loved me BEFORE I did ANYTHING. Now, here's the meaning of that for me: I felt comforted, assured. I KNEW they loved me. They'd get mad at me. Dad would sometimes discipline me, I had some ( now embarrassing) fights with my Mom. BUT I knew they loved me - unconditionally, not because of who I am or am not, but because they have this incredible ability to love. And nothing would change that, nothing would separate me from that. And they would sacrifice for me - and they did. I'd ask my Mom to tell me about before I was born - and she'd go over all that. Again and again. It's good to know.

B. It underlines SOLI DEO GLORIA, that justification (narrow) is GOD'S work and gift, not a reward for dead, unregenerate, atheistic, enemies of God adequately jumping though a series of hoops. Since the key is before we were born, obviously it's not based in our works but God's heart.


6. The doctrine of election not only places all our confidence, hope, comfort and courage in GOD (see point #5 above) but it also takes the pride and burden off of us. We are not the Savior, God is. The doctrine of election builds humility, as well as hope and comfort. God's love and gifts flow from His heart, not our merits. This teaching causes humility and confidence.


7. It is (perhaps) logical to conclude that since God only gives faith to SOME, ergo He desires all others to fly in hell. If not by actively CAUSING such then by simply "passing over" them. Logical, perhaps, but very unbiblical. The Bible says that Jesus came to ALL, that He died for ALL, that God desires ALL to be saved. So while this point (made by St. Augustine and by latter-day radical Calvinists) makes some sense it flat out contradicts Scripture... and it turns a doctrine of great comfort into a horrible terror, changes God from loving to a monster. Again, we have mystery here: God's grace is universal.... God desires all to be saved... Jesus died for all.... God gives faith to some. In the opinion of historic, orthodox Christianity, it is best to leave this where Scripture does and to accept we just don't understand how this cranks out in practice RATHER THAN impose teachings that directly contradict Scripture (the definition of heresy).



Blessings!


Please don't reply HERE.... If you desire to reply, copy/post this to a new thread of your creation in an appropriate sub-forum of CF. Thank you.



.

.