• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Baptists?

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,107
New Zealand
Visit site
✟93,895.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Actually, i would agree with ozspens and that is what the baptists I know also believe.
And psalms like every other scripture is a reliable source of info about God.

Baptists i know do not go round quoting creeds all the time like catholics do. Sometimes creeds are just lazy way of summarizing the bible, and theres things in the creed that are questionable, like for example believing in one holy catholic church.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,107
New Zealand
Visit site
✟93,895.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Our Father God has a son, Jesus who at a certain time in the history of mankind, came to be born. This does not mean Father was not in heaven also at this time. They are not the same person, they are one in the Godhead, and of essensce they are the same like son is like his dad.

This is basic, biblical understanding.
 
Upvote 0

Winken

Heimat
Site Supporter
Sep 24, 2010
5,709
3,505
✟213,877.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No, but I can show that point number four (yours) is not true. Let's take a look at this by way of analogy. Specifically, let's go with Acts 3:15 and pretend that God is in some way like an author. am able to consider individual events, in sequence or as a strategic whole, from that time period, so long as I am properly informed, because I am not contained by it.

This is not fanciful thinking. It's just basic Christian theology. You can't deny point number one without denying God's self-existence, which then means he cannot be the creator of the universe. You can't deny point two without denying point one, because the second point definitively follows from the first point. If you deny the third point, then you deny the deity of Christ. The first two make you a monotheist. The third makes you a Christian.

I wish I had written that.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,553
709
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟140,373.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Does Grudem not know enough about biblical hermeneutics to realize that the book of Psalms is NOT a reliable source upon which to base a theological opinion?

That is your view of the lack of authority and reliability of the Psalms. In fact, it's affirming your low view of Scripture - the Psalms.

This is the biblical view that I, a Baptist, take with regard to Scripture - all of Scripture - (and so does Wayne Grudem, professor of theology & biblical studies at Phoenix Seminary): 'All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work' (2 Tim 3:16-17 ESV).

The Scriptures do not affirm the authority of creeds. The Nicene Creed is a useful summary of theology, but it is not authoritative as are the Scriptures.

The Scriptures affirm that God's attribute of eternity/infinity is not shared by us. According to Job 36:26, Elihu said of God, 'Behold, God is great, and we know him not; the number of his years is unsearchable' (ESV).

God's eternity is suggested by NT passages such as Rev 1:8, 'I am the Alpha and Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty' (ESV). So, God's eternity is affirmed in both OT and NT, the reliable Scriptures that are 'breathed out by God' and have a guess what? They are 'profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness' to equip us for God's good work in our lives. That applies to you and me and all Christians on this forum.

Thus, God is timeless in his being. God was never created so he did not begin to exist. See Gen 1:1; 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16; Heb 1:2.

Second Peter 3:8 confirms that God sees all of time equally: 'But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day' (ESV). Isaiah 46:9-10 affirms similar teaching:

remember the former things of old;
for I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me,
10 declaring the end from the beginning
and from ancient times things not yet done,
saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,
and I will accomplish all my purpose (ESV).

This attribute of God's eternity/infinity is demonstrated in time, where all human beings exist: Acts 17:30-31 provides but one example:

The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead” (ESV).

You can denigrate the Psalms, but that view is not supported by the doctrine of Scripture I've cited above, but the Scriptures affirm God's eternity where:
  • God is timeless in his being;
  • He sees all time equally; and
  • God acts in time - the time we experience.
That's Bible, and denigrating the Psalms is an avoidance mechanism in dealing with the authority and teaching of Scripture on God's eternity/infinity.

If you don't believe the Psalms are a reliable source for theology, why don't you start a new thread with a title such as, 'The Psalms are unreliable teaching on biblical Christianity'. I look forward to the response when and if you bring Psalm 23 into that view.

Oz
 
Upvote 0

CelticRebel

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 21, 2015
623
64
70
✟83,115.00
Faith
Christian
Where is the scriptural evidence that Grudem cited to support his absurd notion that is refuted by the hundreds of passages in the Bible that teach a sequence of events and the cause and effect of each of those events? Does Grudem not know enough about biblical hermeneutics to realize that the book of Psalms is NOT a reliable source upon which to base a theological opinion?

The Nicene Creed, which Grudem seems to ignore, affirms that the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is “of the essence of the Father,” and is “of one substance with the Father.” God, in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Alpha and the Omega (and therefore not “timeless”), most certainly did not see “all of time simultaneously.” Theology that expressly and explicitly contradicts the Nicene Creed (as well as the Bible!) is NOT orthodox theology and does NOT belong in the Baptist forum.

I believe Baptists would not agree with this part of the Nicene Creed: "We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins."
 
Upvote 0

PrincetonGuy

Veteran
Feb 19, 2005
4,905
2,283
U.S.A.
✟170,598.00
Faith
Baptist
That is your view of the lack of authority and reliability of the Psalms. In fact, it's affirming your low view of Scripture - the Psalms.


This is the biblical view that I, a Baptist, take with regard to Scripture - all of Scripture - (and so does Wayne Grudem, professor of theology & biblical studies at Phoenix Seminary): 'AllScripture isbreathed out by Godand profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work' (2 Tim 3:16-17 ESV).


The Scriptures do not affirm the authority of creeds. The Nicene Creed is a useful summary of theology, but it is not authoritative as are the Scriptures.


The Scriptures affirm that God's attribute ofeternity/infinityis not shared by us. According to Job 36:26, Elihu said of God, 'Behold, God is great, and we know him not; the number of his years is unsearchable' (ESV).


God's eternity is suggested by NT passages such as Rev 1:8, 'I am the Alpha and Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty' (ESV). So, God's eternity is affirmed in both OT and NT, the reliable Scriptures that are 'breathed out by God' and have a guess what? They are 'profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness' to equip us for God's good work in our lives. That applies to you and me and all Christians on this forum.


Thus,God is timeless in his being. God was never created so he did not begin to exist. See Gen 1:1; 1 Cor 8:6; Col1:16; Heb 1:2.


Second Peter 3:8 confirms thatGod sees all of time equally: 'But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day' (ESV). Isaiah 46:9-10 affirms similar teaching:




This attribute of God's eternity/infinity is demonstrated in time, where all human beings exist: Acts 17:30-31 provides but one example:




You can denigrate the Psalms, but that view is not supported by the doctrine of Scripture I've cited above, but the Scriptures affirm God's eternity where:

  • God is timeless in his being;
  • He sees all time equally; and
  • God acts in time - the time we experience.
That's Bible, and denigrating the Psalms is an avoidance mechanism in dealing with the authority and teaching of Scripture on God's eternity/infinity.


If you don't believe the Psalms are a reliable source for theology, why don't you start a new thread with a title such as, 'The Psalms are unreliable teaching on biblical Christianity'. I look forward to the response when and if you bring Psalm 23 into that view.


Oz

Why are you arguing against positions that I have never taken in any post in any thread at Christian Forums? In very numerous posts I have affirmed the inspiration of Scripture. And of course God is infinite and man is finite! However, I do recognize the clear and obvious truth that the Psalms are written in a genre of literature that expresses feelings of emotion rather than objective facts—as they were intended to! Psalms 23 is an excellent example of this:

Psalms 23
The Divine Shepherd

A Psalm of David.

1. The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.
2. He makes me lie down in green pastures;
he leads me beside still waters; {Heb [waters of rest]}
3. he restores my soul. {Or [life]}
He leads me in right paths {Or [paths of righteousness]}
for his name's sake.
4. Even though I walk through the darkest valley, {Or [the valley of the shadow of death]}
I fear no evil;
for you are with me;
your rod and your staff—
they comfort me.
5. You prepare a table before me
in the presence of my enemies;
you anoint my head with oil;
my cup overflows.
6. Surely {Or [Only]} goodness and mercy {Or [kindness]} shall follow me
all the days of my life,
and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord
my whole life long. {Heb [for length of days]} (NRSV)

When this psalm is compared with the historical record of David found in Samuel, 1 Kings, and 1 Chronicles, we find one historical contradiction after another. Indeed, there is next to nothing historically accurate in the psalm! When this psalm is compared with Old Testament theology, we find one theological contradiction after another. Indeed, there is next to nothing theologically accurate in the psalm! This inspired psalm was not written as a treatise on ancient Hebrew history or theology—it is an inspired psalm! The same thing is true of the other 149 psalms.


2 Peter 3:3. First of all you must understand this, that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts
4. and saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!”
5. They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water,
6. through which the world of that time was deluged with water and perished.
7. But by the same word the present heavens and earth have been reserved for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the godless.
8. But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.
9. The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance. (NRSV)

These words from Peter do NOT in any way, shape, or form even vaguely suggest that “God sees all of time equally.” Who is man to say that “God sees all of time equally”?

Romans 11:33. O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
34. “For who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?”
35. “Or who has given a gift to him,
to receive a gift in return?”
36. For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever. Amen. (NRSV)

1 Corinthians 2. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.
13. And we speak of these things in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual.
14. Those who are unspiritual do not receive the gifts of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to them, and they are unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
15. Those who are spiritual discern all things, and they are themselves subject to no one else’s scrutiny.
16. “For who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”
But we have the mind of Christ. (NRSV)
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,553
709
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟140,373.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
I believe Baptists would not agree with this part of the Nicene Creed: "We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins."

How do you think that Baptists would understand 'one baptism' in Ephesians 4:4-6,

'4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all' (ESV).​
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,553
709
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟140,373.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Why are you arguing against positions that I have never taken in any post in any thread at Christian Forums? In very numerous posts I have affirmed the inspiration of Scripture. And of course God is infinite and man is finite! However, I do recognize the clear and obvious truth that the Psalms are written in a genre of literature that expresses feelings of emotion rather than objective facts—as they were intended to! Psalms 23 is an excellent example of this:

Psalms 23
The Divine Shepherd

A Psalm of David.

1. The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.
2. He makes me lie down in green pastures;
he leads me beside still waters; {Heb [waters of rest]}
3. he restores my soul. {Or [life]}
He leads me in right paths {Or [paths of righteousness]}
for his name's sake.
4. Even though I walk through the darkest valley, {Or [the valley of the shadow of death]}
I fear no evil;
for you are with me;
your rod and your staff—
they comfort me.
5. You prepare a table before me
in the presence of my enemies;
you anoint my head with oil;
my cup overflows.
6. Surely {Or [Only]} goodness and mercy {Or [kindness]} shall follow me
all the days of my life,
and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord
my whole life long. {Heb [for length of days]} (NRSV)

When this psalm is compared with the historical record of David found in Samuel, 1 Kings, and 1 Chronicles, we find one historical contradiction after another. Indeed, there is next to nothing historically accurate in the psalm! When this psalm is compared with Old Testament theology, we find one theological contradiction after another. Indeed, there is next to nothing theologically accurate in the psalm! This inspired psalm was not written as a treatise on ancient Hebrew history or theology—it is an inspired psalm! The same thing is true of the other 149 psalms.


2 Peter 3:3. First of all you must understand this, that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts
4. and saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!”
5. They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water,
6. through which the world of that time was deluged with water and perished.
7. But by the same word the present heavens and earth have been reserved for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the godless.
8. But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day.
9. The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance. (NRSV)

These words from Peter do NOT in any way, shape, or form even vaguely suggest that “God sees all of time equally.” Who is man to say that “God sees all of time equally”?

Romans 11:33. O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
34. “For who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?”
35. “Or who has given a gift to him,
to receive a gift in return?”
36. For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever. Amen. (NRSV)

1 Corinthians 2. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.
13. And we speak of these things in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual.
14. Those who are unspiritual do not receive the gifts of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to them, and they are unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
15. Those who are spiritual discern all things, and they are themselves subject to no one else’s scrutiny.
16. “For who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”
But we have the mind of Christ. (NRSV)

There are contradictions in this post. You state,
Why are you arguing against positions that I have never taken in any post in any thread at Christian Forums? In very numerous posts I have affirmed the inspiration of Scripture.

Then you state of Psalm 23,
When this psalm is compared with the historical record of David found in Samuel, 1 Kings, and 1 Chronicles, we find one historical contradiction after another. Indeed, there is next to nothing historically accurate in the psalm! When this psalm is compared with Old Testament theology, we find one theological contradiction after another.

So you affirm the inspiration of Scripture but this Scripture contains a Psalm (23) with 'one historical contradiction after another'. That's an oxymoron: God's inspiration that contains poetry that affirms contradiction. The Psalms were never meant for conveying history. They are poetry that are theopneustos, breathed out by God (2 Tim 3:16-17). The God who breathes out Scripture does not breathe out contradiction.
 
Upvote 0

CelticRebel

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 21, 2015
623
64
70
✟83,115.00
Faith
Christian
How do you think that Baptists would understand 'one baptism' in Ephesians 4:4-6,

'4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all' (ESV).​

Since Baptists define a NT baptism as believer's baptism by immersion, that's probably how they would look at that verse.
 
Upvote 0

Pedrito

Newbie
May 4, 2015
165
25
✟23,230.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
In Post #43, Goodbook stated:

Interesting that baptists tend to believe that God offers people choices, of our own free will to love him, whearas those of the calvinist perusuasion like to insist that God has just fixed peoples lives before they were even born, whether to be his or not.

This calvinist interpretation does your head in. i dont agree with it at all, but there may be a few in baptist circles that do, since we have have free will!!! Lol.


Let me quote from a Baptist Confession of Faith.

The Baptist Confession of Faith (1689) With slight revisions by C. H. Spurgeon

10. Effectual Calling

1. Those whom God has predestinated to life, He is pleased in His appointed and accepted time to effectually call by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death which they are in by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ ....

2. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not on account of anything at all foreseen in man ....

3. Infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, Who works when, where, and how He pleases. So also are all elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

4. Others are not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may experience some common operations of the Spirit, yet because they are not effectually drawn by the Father, they will not and cannot truly come to Christ and therefore cannot be saved.


These thoughts were replicated in other Baptist confessions, including the The New Hampshire Confession of Faith in 1742. (Check online.)


It is of interest to note however, that later statements of faith seem to exclude any mention of God's election with respect to infants and those who don't get a chance to hear the Gospel.


In Post #91 in the Dispensationalism thread, JM said: “Historically, Baptists have lead missions due to their eschatology which was...ready for it...Post-Mil! Haha. Most Baptists today are Dispensationalists. Baptists of old tended to be Postmil, some were Premil but everyone was a Historicist. The whole reason for the modern mission movement was due to the idea that we must reach the world for Christ and Christianize it, creating a millennial period of peace on earth, before Christ returns.”

JM also said in Post #6 of the Old Southern Baptist Beliefs thread: “Yes, modern Baptists have changed the fundamental principles and presuppostions that support their doctrine but not the doctrine itself.”

He then goes on to say: “If you look at the writings of the 17th century Baptists you will find they base their defence of believers baptism on the biblical idea of covenants. Covenant theology was lost after the advent of Liberalism, which caused a reactionary and unbiblical defence of Baptist doctrine. Now we have Dispensationalism in its place. Dispensationalism was created in the 1820's and insists on a wooden, literalistic reading of scripture.”

The above may be more confusing than helpful, but it is information from the horse's mouth so to speak.


There are two things about all this that puzzle me, and I request clarification.

1. With respect to infants, I have heard it said that they are protected until they reach the age of responsibility. Having watched my son grow up, and now watching my grandkids grow up, I cannot help but wonder how the Bible defines the age of responsibility. With respect to my grandkids, what does the Bible say about how I can tell when each has reached that age, and therefore has lost that initial “infant” protection.

2. Unless of course, not all infants are among the elect – meaning some are preallocated to an eternity of screaming agony. If all infants belonged to the elect, they would not lose their protection at the age of responsibility. Would they?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PrincetonGuy
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,553
709
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟140,373.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Since Baptists define a NT baptism as believer's baptism by immersion, that's probably how they would look at that verse.

Why would Baptists not define this one baptism according to 1 Corinthians 12:13, 'For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit' (ESV)?
 
Upvote 0

CelticRebel

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 21, 2015
623
64
70
✟83,115.00
Faith
Christian
Why would Baptists not define this one baptism according to 1 Corinthians 12:13, 'For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit' (ESV)?

Many do, some do not. I have been on a Baptist forum where that was the case. Personally, that's how I define it.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,107
New Zealand
Visit site
✟93,895.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
The age of responisbility is when a child know the difference between good and evil, usually in the OT i think there is some scripture in that you need to look it up. It does not say what age in years...but i think generally when puberty kicks in a child becomes an adult with adult responisbilities around aged 13 as thats when most bar mitzvahs celebrate it. There are also now bat mitsvahs for girls.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,107
New Zealand
Visit site
✟93,895.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
In some church circles this would be called confirmation. I dont know if the baptists have this, but, since baptists dont usually do infant baptism, any child that does come to believe will be baptised no matter what age they come to know the Lord. Ive seen children been baptised at age 12.
I think believing parents can actually baptise their own children...if they bathe them as most parents do, its like baptism anyway.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,107
New Zealand
Visit site
✟93,895.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
I think dont worry if you lose a child before they can choose to believe if you are a believer yoruself. cos God loves children and any that are stillborn or miscarried He will bring to heaven based on the parents faith. I think the responsibilty of faith is on the parent until the child can come to believe.

Theres no explicit scripture on this but Jesus said suffer the little children and forbid them not to come to me.
 
Upvote 0

PrincetonGuy

Veteran
Feb 19, 2005
4,905
2,283
U.S.A.
✟170,598.00
Faith
Baptist
Let me quote from a Baptist Confession of Faith.


The Baptist Confession of Faith (1689) With slight revisions by C. H. Spurgeon


10. Effectual Calling


1. Those whom God has predestinated to life, He is pleased in His appointed and accepted time to effectually call by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death which they are in by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ ....


2. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not on account of anything at all foreseen in man ....


3. Infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, Who works when, where, and how He pleases. So also are all elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.


4. Others are not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may experience some common operations of the Spirit, yet because they are not effectually drawn by the Father, they will not and cannot truly come to Christ and therefore cannot be saved.


There are two things about all this that puzzle me, and I request clarification.


1. With respect to infants, I have heard it said that they are protected until they reach the age of responsibility. Having watched my son grow up, and now watching my grandkids grow up, I cannot help but wonder how the Bible defines the age of responsibility. With respect to my grandkids, what does the Bible say about how I can tell when each has reached that age, and therefore has lost that initial “infant” protection.


2. Unless of course, not all infants are among the elect – meaning some are preallocated to an eternity of screaming agony. If all infants belonged to the elect, they would not lose their protection at the age of responsibility. Would they?


If all infants, and all children who have not yet reached the age of responsibility, are automatically protected from eternal damnation should they die in that state, all parents have the moral and ethical responsibility to make absolutely certain that their children do not reach the age of responsibility. In those cases where the parents fail to live up to their moral and ethical responsibility, the grandparents have the moral and ethical responsibility to intervene and make absolutely certain that their grandchildren do not reach the age of responsibility. In the most horrible event that both the parents and the grandparents fail to live up to their responsibility as good Christians, it is the responsibility of the church to make absolutely certain that the children do not reach the age of responsibility and consequently be in jeopardy of eternal damnation.

Most fortunately, however, the Bible does not teach that all infants, and all children who have not yet reached the age of responsibility, are automatically protected from eternal damnation should they die in that state. Therefore, neither the parents, nor the grandparents, nor the church have the responsibility to commit infanticide to assure that the children do not reach the age of responsibility and thereby be in jeopardy of eternal damnation.

Since the Bible does not teach that all infants, and all children who have not yet reached the age of responsibility, are automatically protected from eternal damnation should they die in that state, most Christians other than Baptists and the like have their infants baptized lest they die before they have the opportunity to hear and believe the gospel—and thus be saved from eternal damnation. However, does the baptism of infants actually protect them from the consequence of original sin? Which doctrine is true—the doctrine of the age of responsibility (or accountability) along with credobaptism; or the doctrine of paedobaptism? Should Baptist parents have their infant children baptized, or should they gamble that their Baptist beliefs are true? I am a Baptist with Baptist beliefs—but how sure am I that my Baptist beliefs are true?
 
Upvote 0