The Doctrine of Creation: A Critique of Credobaptism.

GreekOrthodox

Psalti Chrysostom
Oct 25, 2010
4,121
4,187
Yorktown VA
✟176,292.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I hardly think that is necessary. I will assume this is because they wish to feel pain not just show how much of a man they are.

Anyway I hope what I said before made some sense as to why we baptize by immersion. We don't do so to feel pain or somehow do penitence.

Like I said, we ordinarily baptize by immersion. The Russians just like to go to extremes. If baptism doesnt actually "do" anything and is only a metaphor, why does the form mean anything to the non sacramental POV?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
10,934
5,592
49
The Wild West
✟461,674.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I hardly think that is necessary. I will assume this is because they wish to feel pain not just show how much of a man they are.

No, in my experience Russians are in a minority of people who enjoy swimming in cold water. They cut out crosses in the snow and swim in them on Epiphany, or Theophany as Eastern Orthodox call it, the feast of the Baptism of Christ.

In my youth, I attended a boy scout meeting in Washington State, near Bremerton, on the Sound, and there was a local troop nicknamed the Polar Bears who loved swimming in the chilly waters of the Puget Sound. For me, even the ocean in Southern California is too cold; I have only enjoyed swimming in Maui, Florida and the Carribean. To many Russians, and Alaskans I expect, and some Canadians, such as those in the Ontario Northlands, and the northern reaches of Quebec, and the Yukon, and Northwest Territories, and the Inuit, swimming Puget Sound would be like swimming in Maui, swimming in California like the Carribean on a hot day, and swimming in Maui or the Carribean a good substitute for a jacuzzi.
 
Upvote 0

Ain't Zwinglian

Well-Known Member
Feb 23, 2020
743
385
Oregon
✟103,880.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Immersion symbolizes being buried and raised with Christ.
Romans 6:4

Ah yes, Romans 6:4. This is the mother lode for Credobaptists. All of Baptist belief understanding of baptism can be centered around this particular pericope.

For Baptists, this passage of Scripture clearly shows that a Christian is only to be immersed. They will typically couple this verse with other baptismal texts that depict immersion baptism such as Matthew 3, Acts 8, and 10.

On the other hand, for Paedobaptists, Romans 6:4 this is a most beloved passage, which gives hope for the forgiveness of sins and shows the Salvific content of baptism.

Critical to how Credobaptists justify “immersion only baptism” is specifically the word “buried.” It is used only twice in the NT and only by Paul.

Normally immersionists will use the word “picture” or “symbol” to describe “burial” as going under the water. And from the analogy of the “picture” of burial, come to the conclusion of the mode of immersion baptism only. Another popular way Credobaptists describe Romans 6:4 is the word “identification.” They will say we “identify with Christ” in immersion baptism. Just exactly what Baptist’s mean by this is not define.

Scripturally, “to bury” refers to any process in which we place human remains in their final resting place.

Furthermore, we have to make a distinction between modern western and ancient mid-eastern burial practices. In the ancient middle east, it was common for prominent people to be buried in a tomb. The Egyptian pharaohs were buried in their pyramids. Abraham was buried in a cave. King David was buried in a tomb in Jerusalem. The raising of Lazarus was from a tomb. And Jesus was buried a tomb.

Jesus was not buried in the ground and immersed with dirt. This is not a picture of immersion baptism.

The women in the morning didn’t go to the tomb of Jesus with shovels, picks, and a wheel barrow to dig up the body of Jesus. This is not a picture of immersion baptism.

We Americans interchange the words “buried” and “tomb” frequently. Remember Gaucho Marx famous question: Who was buried in Grant’s Tomb? Grant and his wife!

When credo’s state this is a “picture” of immersion baptism, they are confusing modern burial practices with ancient mid eastern practices.

And even if this were a “picture” of the administration of baptism, the “picture” would be of sprinkling or pouring. Why? Because sprinkling and pouring is done above ground level…the way Jesus was buried! The very passage of the credos use to promote their belief in immersion only baptism, actually works against them.

Romans 6 is not a “picture” of immersion baptism; it is not a “parable” of concerning the mode of immersion baptism; and it is certainly not a doctrine of a supposed “liquid grave.”

A distinction must be made between what baptism accomplishes (Romans 6) and how baptism is to be administered (All the texts in the Book of Acts showing examples of baptism). Romans 6 is not a text on how to administer baptism.

This will be discussed in next post.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,641.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ah yes, Romans 6:4. This is the mother lode for Credobaptists. All of Baptist belief understanding of baptism can be centered around this particular pericope.

For Baptists, this passage of Scripture clearly shows that a Christian is only to be immersed. They will typically couple this verse with other baptismal texts that depict immersion baptism such as Matthew 3, Acts 8, and 10.

On the other hand, for Paedobaptists, Romans 6:4 this is a most beloved passage, which gives hope for the forgiveness of sins and shows the Salvific content of baptism.

Critical to how Credobaptists justify “immersion only baptism” is specifically the word “buried.” It is used only twice in the NT and only by Paul.

Normally immersionists will use the word “picture” or “symbol” to describe “burial” as going under the water. And from the analogy of the “picture” of burial, come to the conclusion of the mode of immersion baptism only. Another popular way Credobaptists describe Romans 6:4 is the word “identification.” They will say we “identify with Christ” in immersion baptism. Just exactly what Baptist’s mean by this is not define.

Scripturally, “to bury” refers to any process in which we place human remains in their final resting place.

Furthermore, we have to make a distinction between modern western and ancient mid-eastern burial practices. In the ancient middle east, it was common for prominent people to be buried in a tomb. The Egyptian pharaohs were buried in their pyramids. Abraham was buried in a cave. King David was buried in a tomb in Jerusalem. The raising of Lazarus was from a tomb. And Jesus was buried a tomb.

Jesus was not buried in the ground and immersed with dirt. This is not a picture of immersion baptism.

The women in the morning didn’t go to the tomb of Jesus with shovels, picks, and a wheel barrow to dig up the body of Jesus. This is not a picture of immersion baptism.

We Americans interchange the words “buried” and “tomb” frequently. Remember Gaucho Marx famous question: Who was buried in Grant’s Tomb? Grant and his wife!

When credo’s state this is a “picture” of immersion baptism, they are confusing modern burial practices with ancient mid eastern practices.

And even if this were a “picture” of the administration of baptism, the “picture” would be of sprinkling or pouring. Why? Because sprinkling and pouring is done above ground level…the way Jesus was buried! The very passage of the credos use to promote their belief in immersion only baptism, actually works against them.

Romans 6 is not a “picture” of immersion baptism; it is not a “parable” of concerning the mode of immersion baptism; and it is certainly not a doctrine of a supposed “liquid grave.”

A distinction must be made between what baptism accomplishes (Romans 6) and how baptism is to be administered (All the texts in the Book of Acts showing examples of baptism). Romans 6 is not a text on how to administer baptism.

This will be discussed in next post.

We do realize that Jesus was buried in a tomb not in a modern dug out grave site.
It may not be under the dirt but it is still called a burial.

It isn't just the being buried part, it is the coming up from the water which symbolizes being raised that is equally important.
Colossians 2:12
Having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.

I will ask again, what do you have against immersion?
 
Upvote 0

Ain't Zwinglian

Well-Known Member
Feb 23, 2020
743
385
Oregon
✟103,880.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I will ask again, what do you have against immersion?

I have already commented on this question in post #30.

"I don't deny the validity of immersion baptism, I deny the necessity of it."

So I ask you, why do you affirm the necessity of immersion baptism?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,641.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have already commented on this question in post #30.

"I don't deny the validity of immersion baptism, I deny the necessity of it."

Okay. I must have missed that.

So I ask you, why do you affirm the necessity of immersion baptism?

And I have already answered this.
1) Its a public declaration. You in front of the church community. This takes commitment that an infant cannot give.

2) It requires more from the person being baptized. They are not just recipients but are more actively taking part. This makes it more impactful on your entire being.

3) Going down represents burial and coming up represents the resurrection.
A sprinkling would not feel like a baptism to me since it would not feel like it represented burial and resurrection in the slightest.

4) It follows what Jesus did.

5) Only done by older children and adults who will remember this commitment. A baptism should be remembered. Baptism by immersion will be more memorable for all the reasons above.
 
Upvote 0

Ain't Zwinglian

Well-Known Member
Feb 23, 2020
743
385
Oregon
✟103,880.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Only done by older children and adults who will remember this commitment. A baptism should be remembered. Baptism by immersion will be more memorable for all the reasons above.

Where does it say it in Scripture baptism should be remembered? Chapter and verse please.

1) Its a public declaration.

Where does Scripture say baptism is a public declaration? Chapter and verse please.

2) It requires more from the person being baptized. They are not just recipients but are more actively taking part.

Absolutely not! Baptism has at least three elements. Water, the name of God placed upon you, and ANOTHER christian baptizing you. You are completely PASSIVE in your baptism. Where does the Scriptures say you have to take an active part, when NO CHRISTIAN can baptized himself. Chapter and verse for being "active" in your baptism please.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

coffee4u

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2018
5,005
2,817
Australia
✟157,641.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Where does it say it in Scripture baptism should be remembered? Chapter and verse please.



Where does Scripture say baptism is a public declaration? Chapter and verse please.



Absolutely not! Baptism has at least three elements. Water, the name of God placed upon you, and ANOTHER christian baptizing you. You are completely PASSIVE in your baptism. Where does the Scriptures say you have to take an active part, when NO CHRISTIAN can baptized himself. Chapter and verse for being "active" in your baptism please.

I knew you wouldn't understand.

Now you ask for verses again, I already posted verses.

Matthew 3:13-17
John 3:23
Acts 8:36-38
Romans 6:3-6
Colossians 2:12

1 Corinthians 10:2 (from Exodus 14:21-22)

I am simply showing you why I believe in baptism by immersion.
I am not here to convert you, now understand and be at peace that not everyone shares you view on sprinkling.


If you have nothing against immersion why are you fighting against it so hard?
 
Upvote 0

Ain't Zwinglian

Well-Known Member
Feb 23, 2020
743
385
Oregon
✟103,880.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Where does Scripture say baptism is a public declaration? Chapter and verse please.

You conveniently avoided this question. Baptism as a public declaration or public proclamation is the true definition of baptism for the Credobaptist. My question still stands, where in Scripture is the found.

Answer: The public proclamation of our faith is NOT found in Baptism, it is found the in Lord's Supper.

I Cor. 11:26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.

The Christian's public declaration of his faith is found in the Lord's Supper not baptism. Why? Because the Christian is active in receiving the Lord's Supper as in "Take, eat" and "Take, drink" whereas, in Baptism we are purely passive.

You will not find "proclamation" language in any of the baptismal text you cited, because baptism is not a public proclamation. Paedobaptists have always held that our public proclamation is in the Lord's Supper, but never in Baptism. Why? Because it ain't there.

Baptists on the other hand just state "willy nilly" baptism is a public proclamation with no Scriptural verse or verses to back it up. For the last two hundred years in the English language paedobaptists have been asking Baptists to provide Scriptural verses for their belief...but all we get is silence.

And silence is the best answer for the credos, but their ain't no verse to support "baptism is a public proclamation of one's faith."

Coffee4u---you can be the new John Calvin, or Martin Luther for the Baptists....please be the first baptist to explain why Baptism is a public proclamation. You will go down in history.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Ain't Zwinglian

Well-Known Member
Feb 23, 2020
743
385
Oregon
✟103,880.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single

You conveniently listed verses that seem to point to immersion baptism, but avoided verses of Scripture that shows it’s improbability.

---------------

The problem as I see it.

Paedobaptists hold that scripture defines “baptizo” widely to incorporate, sprinkling, pouring and immersion (Mark7:4, Luke 11:38, Acts 9:18, Acts 22:16).

Baptist define baptizo narrowly as only meaning immersion. There is also a tendency to bind other young Christian consciences to this narrow meaning of the word.

When Baptists define baptizo narrowly, then they end up in a world of hurt…trying to justify how immersion baptism could apply to various baptism in the Book of Acts. They will turn cartwheels over Paul’s baptism as non-immersion as you did. And I have read threads where Baptist try to justify immersion baptism to the point of embarrassment.

What about 3,000 baptized on the day of Pentecost?

  • Did 3,000 people bring a towel and an extra change of clothes?
  • Did 3,000 people walk around dripping wet?
  • Did 3,000 people strip down to their Palestinian G –Strings?
  • Did 3,000 people go skinny dipping?
And would you like to be the 2,989 person baptized? My goodness toilet paper and internal tampons hadn’t been invented yet…and you want me to be baptized in that bio- hazardous soup?

It is hilarious reading about how Baptists try to justify three thousand people were immersed during a festival time in Jerusalem, with a swollen population, and limited water supply and water being precious commodity. Jerusalem was located on a mountain top! No flowing rivers there.

Baptists are dead serious with some of the most bizzare explanations invented by mankind here. Some of the very best eisegesis is done here…showing how 3,000 could be baptized and at the same time the worst exegesis done to the text here also. Funny.

You also conveniently neglected to list or to offer any justification how the Philippian jailor could be immersed in jail complex. Did the jailor and Silas get lowered down a well to be baptized? Did the jailor and Paul temporarily escape jail to take a night hike to a river? I kid you not…these are some of the explanations Baptists have come up with that I have read. Unbelievable.

It comes down to the wide or narrow definition of the word “baptizo.” Baptist are on my bad list…because of the tendency to bind young Christian conscience to narrowly define baptism only means immersion.

Now I will tackle your list....I just don't understand why you are so insistent on a "narrow" definition of baptizo. Baffling.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ain't Zwinglian

Well-Known Member
Feb 23, 2020
743
385
Oregon
✟103,880.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
GOLDILOCKS AND THE THREE MODES OF BAPTISM

The Papa Bear of Immersion: The Papa bear will state that immersion baptism only specifically symbolizes Christ’s death and resurrection (Ro 6 and Col 2). The Papa bear states sprinkling and pouring doesn’t depict this symbolism. Therefore, only immersion is a valid mode of Baptism.

The Mama Bear of Pouring: The Mama bear doesn’t believe immersion specifically symbolizes Christ’s death and resurrection. The Mama bear believes pouring symbolizes the Holy Spirit being "poured out" to the Gentile world (Acts 2) plus Christ’s blood "poured out" for many (Mt 26) through His death on the cross. The Mama Bear states immersion and sprinkling doesn’t depict this symbolism of the Holy Sprit and Christ’s blood. Therefore, only pouring is a valid mode of baptism.

The Baby Bear of Sprinkling: The Baby bear doesn’t believe baptism is symbolic of Christ’s death or resurrection nor the giving of the Holy Spirit. The Baby bear believes sprinkling symbolizes Jesus of the New Coventant “sprinkled in his blood” (Heb 12); it symbolizes without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins (Heb. 9); it symbolizes Jesus being whipped with those droplets of blood signifying “by his wounds we are healed” (I Peter 2). The Baby bear states immersion and pouring doesn’t depict this symbolism. Therefore, only sprinkling is the only valid mode of baptism.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,509
Georgia
✟900,262.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Both Credos and Paedos agree that infants are created in the image of God. Small children have a soul and are spiritual creatures. God gives each of us a spirit by which we can commune with God as God is spirit. The spiritual nature is what distinguishes humans from animals.

When credos say they don’t baptize infants because they can not or do not have faith, what are they actually saying?

They are saying infants are incomplete creatures of God,

That is an extreme bending of their view.

A lot of people admit infants are in capable of solving calculus problems or in fact mastering "abstract concepts", lacking even basic language skills to define "God" or "Good" vs "evil" or "Morally bad" vs "morally good" or in fact the entire concept of "baptism" including "an appeal to God for a clean conscience"

This is a fact - it is irrefutable.

The statement "The assumption here is God is NOT available to an infant or the severely mentally ill….
[/quote]

Is another "extreme" wrenching of the differences since it extends "not able to make an appeal to God for a clean conscience or repent of sin" -- to "God not available at all".

1 Peter 3
:
18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, 20 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Rom 10:
8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

================================

Still waiting to see someone come up with an infant that instead of crying in church will in fact "make an appeal to God for a clean conscience through the resurrrection of Jesus Christ"

and who not only "believes in their heart" that God raised Jesus from the dead - but also "confesses with their mouth that Jesus is Lord".

No wonder R.C. Sproul in his debate with John MacArthur over infant baptism starts off by freely admitting that in the Bible there are no examples of infant baptism.

For the "Sola scriptura testing" folks - that is a big deal.


 
Upvote 0