• 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.

Do sacraments save?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
The Bible speaks of whole households being baptized.
Yes, it does, but they got baptized after they got preached the Word of God and the Holy Ghost came on them. The reason why baptism was even allowed for them was because these gentiles (referring to Acts 10 here, the group with Cornelius), exhibited that they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit... and if they had the Holy Spirit, well we should see them as brothers and not gentiles anymore, right?
So they got baptized.
Answer one question for me (this one has always bothered me): If there is no salvation or means of grace in baptism, why is the mode of the baptism so important? That to me sounds like old testament legalism like that of the pharisees. Why is how it is done so important if it is no more than a symbol, akin to a mason's secret hand shake? Wizzing into the wind as they say.

Because it doesn't give a good picture when it's done in another way.
The picture is of Jesus being buried, and then resurrecting from the dead. If you're immersed in water, you're buried under it, and then you rise up out of it. It's a visceral experience that shows a picture of what Jesus did.

But if you pour or sprinkle water, you don't get buried, the picture no longer works.. and as a result... instead you think the water actually does something, and is not a picture at all, but a purifying ritual. Can you see why that'd be important if it changes the entire meaning of the act in people's minds?

Context is important.

In believer's baptism, and immersion, you're symbolically being buried and resurrecting with Christ. It's meaningful, as something that is again, a visceral picture of what Christ did, but it is also a very public profession of faith. It's something that can strengthen faith, and that important. Regular communion as well, constant reminder of what Christ did, strengthens your faith. So that's important, but they are not purification rituals that save you. in that context. "this do in remembrance"

but in infant baptism, pouring or sprinkling, it's not burial, and not resurrection... so what is it? Ah, it must be a purification ritual.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
It is God's grace in saving that He shows His long-suffering. Christ, who was put to death for our sins, is the Example par excellence of how we, in imitation to Him, ought to be patient and long-suffering.

But Peter very much is talking about salvation. God in His patience is gracious toward us. Just as He was gracious toward Noah and his family, so He is gracious toward us in saving us.

You're not wrong about most of the context, but you seem to be evading a clear point of the text.

"But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always prepared to give answer to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil.

For Christ also suffered once for the sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which He went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through the water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to Him.

Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same way of thinking, for whoever has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin, so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God. For the time that is past suffices for doing what the Gentiles want to do, living in sensuality, passions, drunkenness, orgies, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry. With respect to this they are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you; but they will give account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. For this is why the Gospel is preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does.
" - 1 Peter 3:14-22 - 1 Peter 4:1-6

Why would we suffer for righteousness? Because we have what? Answer: a good conscience.

We can suffer for righteousness sake because something has changed about us. We received something.

Christ suffered once for sin, He being righteous and all the rest of us unrighteous, that He might what? Answer: Bring us to God.

In the same way that God, in His grace and patience saved Noah and his family through water, there is an antitype to this water, and that's baptism, "which now saves you".

You chose to cling to an English translation here, "like figure unto" in order to try and bolster an idea that baptism "figures" or merely represents, symbolically, something. But that's not at all what the text says in the Greek.

The Greek word here is antitypos. Antitypos is literally the opposite of the Greek word typos, a typos ("type") is a figure, an impression--it's ultimately where we get "type" as in the block letters used in the moveable-type printing press. And referring to "type-faces" aka "fonts", and to the "type-writer", etc. And derived from this is also where we speak of a "type" of something, "that's my type of person" meaning an impression of an idealized person; or a "type" of something, a generalized figure of a thing, a class of something.

The waters of the flood are the typos, the antitypos is baptism. The antitypos is not the impression or "figure", but the opposite. If I paint a picture of someone, that picture is the typos, the person themselves is the antitypos.

Baptism, the antitypos, is not the impression, but the concrete thing itself; baptism is what the waters of the flood anticipate, point toward as the fuller and greater reality.

The ancient sacrifices of Israel are typos, Christ's sacrifice on the cross is the antitypos.
The Kohen Gadol (high priest) of Israel is the typos, Christ as the Great High Priest is the antitypos.
The Tabernacle/Temple in Jerusalem was the typos, Christ who was crucified and rose again and said "tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up again" and about whom John in His Gospel writes, "The Word became flesh and tabernacled in our midst" is the antitypos.

The things of old are the typos, the new things in Christ are the antitypos.

Baptism is the antitypos, not the typos. It is through this antitype, which the work of God's saving Noah and his family through the waters of the flood ultimately points, that God does what? Even as He saved them He does what for us now? He saves us.

"Which now saves us", .

So Christ having suffered once for sin shows us the long-suffering patience of God, shows us how we too shall be patient. Not because we can, by our own power be like God. But rather because God who is long-suffering rescues us, reconciles us, and does what? Gives us a good conscience toward God.

A good conscience, a new conscience, by which we now no longer living as slaves to the passions of the flesh but alive unto God by the new life we have in Christ by His resurrection. This new conscience by which we, formerly disobedient and slaves to the passions, have a new obedience should be found patient, and giving answer to the hope that we have, being kind, gentle, respectful in all that we do. Suffering, if it is God's will, for the good that we do rather than evil. For those who malign us, who revile us, who slander us for being obedient to God, in suffering for God with patience, they will one day be judged--but we vindicated. Vindicated not because of our own righteousness, but vindicated in the righteousness of Jesus--He who suffered as the righteous for the unrighteous.

You weren't altogether wrong about the context, but you are still missing what is being said. You are overlooking the point, overlooking the GRACE of God.

Take a gander here at what Peter is saying in this part of his epistle. Look at it, and now look at what Paul says over in Romans chapter 6.

-CryptoLutheran
I'm not evading a point, because I don't think Peter's point here was "you get saved by getting wet" as I keep pointing out Peter compared baptism to two things, the flood of Noah, and resurrection of Jesus.

It's very much how Baptists view Baptism though we mostly focus on the burial and resurrection of Jesus.

would you agree that if the bible teaches something repeatedly over and over but then seems to say something else in 1 verse taken out of context that it's the 1 out of context verse based doctrine that's probably wrong? If salvation is over and over said to be grace and a free gift and Jesus says multiple times that he who believes in me has eternal life and you can read Isaiah 53 where Messiah is bruised for our iniquities and by His stripes we are healed so it wasn't even totally a novel concept in the bible.. why does 1 single verse change what is salvific from Jesus' atonement for us, and believing on Him... to water baptism?

I think the context clarified at least for me, that Peter is not overhauling or adding to salvation, but showing baptism to be a picture (the like figure) of the Flood/wrath of God/death, and Jesus' resurrection. Then it comes into agreement with the rest of scripture on salvation, that Jesus' death and resurrection saves us.
But if you take that out of context verse at face value and only see the words "baptism doth also now save us" Now the bible is inconsistent, and now your theology of salvation warps, from it being Jesus paying the price for your sin on the cross and being resurrected, to, performing a bunch of sacraments and works.
Not accusing people here of this but in some Catholics I have talked to they don't believe in substitutionary atonement, they believe in the sacraments only, they believe in their works only. They can't answer why Christ had to die. People had been getting baptized before Christ died, people had been getting the holy spirit before Christ died, people had been doing "good works" before Christ died, etc etc etc. Without substitutionary atonement.. there's no rationale for Christ to die.
It can be deadly to have the wrong gospel.
 
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
31,051
5,870
✟1,018,731.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Yes, it does, but they got baptized after they got preached the Word of God and the Holy Ghost came on them. The reason why baptism was even allowed for them was because these gentiles (referring to Acts 10 here, the group with Cornelius), exhibited that they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit... and if they had the Holy Spirit, well we should see them as brothers and not gentiles anymore, right?
So they got baptized.


Because it doesn't give a good picture when it's done in another way.
The picture is of Jesus being buried, and then resurrecting from the dead. If you're immersed in water, you're buried under it, and then you rise up out of it. It's a visceral experience that shows a picture of what Jesus did.

But if you pour or sprinkle water, you don't get buried, the picture no longer works.. and as a result... instead you think the water actually does something, and is not a picture at all, but a purifying ritual. Can you see why that'd be important if it changes the entire meaning of the act in people's minds?

Context is important.

In believer's baptism, and immersion, you're symbolically being buried and resurrecting with Christ. It's meaningful, as something that is again, a visceral picture of what Christ did, but it is also a very public profession of faith. It's something that can strengthen faith, and that important. Regular communion as well, constant reminder of what Christ did, strengthens your faith. So that's important, but they are not purification rituals that save you. in that context. "this do in remembrance"

but in infant baptism, pouring or sprinkling, it's not burial, and not resurrection... so what is it? Ah, it must be a purification ritual.
If what you say is true, we are to then assume that when whole households are spoken of, they must all have been middle aged with grown Children; same goes for servants and slaves... last of their generation, no progeny to follow.

Truly, if it is purely symbolic then it is of men and not of God, and it is whizzing up a rope.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
If what you say is true, we are to then assume that when whole households are spoken of, they must all have been middle aged with grown Children; same goes for servants and slaves... last of their generation, no progeny to follow.
Not entirely, and children can believe if they're old enough, maybe it means there were no infants.

Let's think about Joshua 7, the children of Achan were all stoned and then their bodies burned. Do you think God told Joshua to hold young children accountable for their father's sin? Likely not, but older children would have kept their father's secret and thus been complicit in the sin, and they were held accountable.
Truly, if it is purely symbolic then it is of men and not of God, and it is whizzing up a rope.
as I pointed out with Hebrews 10, the sacrifices were also symbolic. They did not absolve sin.
Yet God told them to do them.
Jesus told disciples to be baptized and to take communion "this do in remembrance of me"
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,603
6,010
Minnesota
✟335,621.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I'm not evading a point, because I don't think Peter's point here was "you get saved by getting wet" as I keep pointing out Peter compared baptism to two things, the flood of Noah, and resurrection of Jesus.
The Catholic Catechism puts it well:
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua), and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word."
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
7,638
2,467
Perth
✟206,341.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The Catholic Catechism puts it well:
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua), and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word."
What is more, is that the phrases in the paragraph are drawn from holy scripture, yet evangelicals say baptism is merely symbolic and cannot save as well as does not save. consider the phrases
  • regeneration through water in the word. Titus 3:5
  • reborn as sons of God - John 3:5
  • we become members of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12:13
Steeped in holy scripture as the Catechism of the Catholic Church is, many evangelicals accuse Catholicism of not being biblical and here we see just how deeply unbiblical evangelicalism is on the sacraments.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
The Catholic Catechism puts it well:
1213 Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit (vitae spiritualis ianua), and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: "Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word."
"the like figure"

as I keep pointing out. you latch onto just 1 clause of 1 verse, and ignore the context.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
7,638
2,467
Perth
✟206,341.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
"the like figure"

as I keep pointing out. you latch onto just 1 clause of 1 verse, and ignore the context.
Except it isn't one verse, it is many verses which were listed before.
John 3:5, 1Peter 3:21, Titus 3:5, 1Cor 12:13, Eph 5:26, Acts 22:16.​
Baptism is a whole lot more than symbolic, much more than a metaphor.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Except it isn't one verse, it is many verses which were listed before.
John 3:5, 1Peter 3:21, Titus 3:5, 1Cor 12:13, Eph 5:26, Acts 22:16.​
Baptism is a whole lot more than symbolic, much more than a metaphor.

John 3 is talking about being born physically, and then spiritually. Baptism represents being buried and resurrecting (as Peter notes in 1 Peter 3), not birth
we've gone over 1 Peter 3 to death
Titus is talking about being renewed by the holy spirit.
1 Corinthians 12 is again, talking about being baptized by the Holy Spirit, not water. Paul used Euphemisms like circumcision of the heart. No he's not talking about getting open heart surgery.
Acts 22 it's the calling on the Lord that washes away the sins, not the physical act of baptism.
Mind you baptism is often the first thing done after being saved. That's how it was treated in Acts in general.

But John the Baptist said it best himself:
Matthew 3
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,603
6,010
Minnesota
✟335,621.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
John 3 is talking about being born physically, and then spiritually. Baptism represents being buried and resurrecting (as Peter notes in 1 Peter 3)
we've gone over 1 Peter 3 to death
Titus is talking about being renewed by the holy spirit.
1 Corinthians 12 is again, talking about being baptized by the Holy Spirit, not water. Paul used Euphemisms like circumcision of the heart. No he's not talking about getting open heart surgery.
Acts 22 it's the calling on the Lord that washes away the sins, not the physical act of baptism.
Mind you baptism is often the first thing done after being saved. That's how it was treated in Acts in general.

But John the Baptist said it best himself:
Matthew 3
You keep confusing the most common sign of the sacrament of Baptism(water) with the actual work done by God within the sacrament. 1 Corinthians has it right, the sacrament of Baptism is indeed being baptized by the Holy Spirit. God often works through people and sometimes through objects. God did not have to send the Apostles out to spread His Word, or use spittle to cure blindness, or have someone touch bones to be cured.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
7,638
2,467
Perth
✟206,341.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
John 3 is talking about being born physically, and then spiritually. Baptism represents being buried and resurrecting (as Peter notes in 1 Peter 3)
we've gone over 1 Peter 3 to death
Titus is talking about being renewed by the holy spirit.
1 Corinthians 12 is again, talking about being baptized by the Holy Spirit, not water. Paul used Euphemisms like circumcision of the heart. No he's not talking about getting open heart surgery.
Acts 22 it's the calling on the Lord that washes away the sins, not the physical act of baptism.
Mind you baptism is often the first thing done after being saved. That's how it was treated in Acts in general.

But John the Baptist said it best himself:
Matthew 3
All of these verses are about baptism - John 3:5, 1Peter 3:21, Titus 3:5, 1Cor 12:13, Eph 5:26, Acts 22:16.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
You keep confusing the most common sign of the sacrament of Baptism(water) with the actual work done by God within the sacrament. 1 Corinthians has it right, the sacrament of Baptism is indeed being baptized by the Holy Spirit. God often works through people and sometimes through objects. God did not have to send the Apostles out to spread His Word, or use spittle to cure blindness, or have someone touch bones to be cured.
if you were to say something like, Baptism strengthens someone's faith, or is a public statement of faith or something like that, I'd agree with it. The issue is that at least this is what I'm getting, and seems to be the stance of the Catholic Church, is that the physical act of baptism with water, washes away sins even absent of faith in Jesus (IE with infants)

In every case in Acts, Baptism was preceded by faith in Jesus.
Like if this was believer's baptism we were talking about, I wouldn't sweat it as much, because the important thing is that they have faith in Jesus.
If a person says "I'm going to heaven, because I got baptized as a baby in a Catholic Church", I'd disagree. If that's all they have, I'd disagree and say no sir, you're still on the way to hell.

I will say though, that if you believe the physical act of water baptism is salvific, why doesn't the RCC do it the biblical way?
If they believe first then get baptized, well that's fine, that's biblical and I wouldn't say it was the water baptism that saved them in particular but it's part of the relationship so it's important to do.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
7,638
2,467
Perth
✟206,341.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
if you were to say something like, Baptism strengthens someone's faith, or is a public statement of faith or something like that, I'd agree with it.
Only a protestant could say that, someone who ignores what the scriptures say about baptism and substitutes their doctrine in the place of holy scripture. None of the ancient churches can agree to that opinion because it is unbiblical.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
31,051
5,870
✟1,018,731.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
if you were to say something like, Baptism strengthens someone's faith, or is a public statement of faith or something like that, I'd agree with it. The issue is that at least this is what I'm getting, and seems to be the stance of the Catholic Church, is that the physical act of baptism with water, washes away sins even absent of faith in Jesus (IE with infants)

In every case in Acts, Baptism was preceded by faith in Jesus.
Like if this was believer's baptism we were talking about, I wouldn't sweat it as much, because the important thing is that they have faith in Jesus.
If a person says "I'm going to heaven, because I got baptized as a baby in a Catholic Church", I'd disagree. If that's all they have, I'd disagree and say no sir, you're still on the way to hell.

I will say though, that if you believe the physical act of water baptism is salvific, why doesn't the RCC do it the biblical way?
If they believe first then get baptized, well that's fine, that's biblical and I wouldn't say it was the water baptism that saved them in particular but it's part of the relationship so it's important to do.
Really?

I would assume that if they can say that in good faith, the rest of their faith is in pretty good trim as well.

I have had reformed protestants ask me if I have been born again; my answer is yes, at my baptism, I was less than two weeks old. Odd that I have faith in the promise of baptism and in He who made that promise, but others don't have enough personal faith to accept Jesus Christ at his word.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Really?

I would assume that if they can say that in good faith, the rest of their faith is in pretty good trim as well.

I have had reformed protestants ask me if I have been born again; my answer is yes, at my baptism, I was less than two weeks old. Odd that I have faith in the promise of baptism and in He who made that promise, but others don't have enough personal faith to accept Jesus Christ at his word.
You didn't believe when you were "baptized" so, no.
People get baptized as a baby in the Catholic Church and then go apostate.
That's not salvation
that's not being born again.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Only a protestant could say that, someone who ignores what the scriptures say about baptism and substitutes their doctrine in the place of holy scripture. None of the ancient churches can agree to that opinion because it is unbiblical.

Infant "baptism" is not biblical, believer's baptism is.
Sprinkling is not biblical, immersion is.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
7,638
2,467
Perth
✟206,341.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
if you were to say something like, Baptism strengthens someone's faith, or is a public statement of faith or something like that, I'd agree with it.
Only a protestant could say that, someone who ignore what the scriptures say about baptism and substitutes their doctrine in the place of holy scripture. None of the ancient churches can agree to that opinion because it is unbiblical.
Infant "baptism" is not biblical, believer's baptism is.
Sprinkling is not biblical, immersion is.
immersion/submersion is not stipulated in scripture so it is unbiblical. But it is not anti-biblical any more than pouring water over the head is.

infant baptism and believers baptism are both biblical.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,603
6,010
Minnesota
✟335,621.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Infant "baptism" is not biblical, believer's baptism is.
Sprinkling is not biblical, immersion is.
Baptism replaced circumcision, as with circumcision the faith of the parents is enough. Jesus wanted the children to come to him. Given these two facts it should be no surprise that whole households were baptized.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Baptism replaced circumcision, as with circumcision the faith of the parents is enough. Jesus wanted the children to come to him. Given these two facts it should be no surprise that whole households were baptized.
but in those passages of acts, whole households were preached to and they believed first.
Acts 8 has the thing that would have hindered the Eunuch from being baptized was belief in Jesus. Acts 10 the rationale for baptizing the gentiles was that they had the Holy Spirit after being preached the Word of God (they believed). There isn't biblical support for baptism in unbelief. There's only support for people believing and getting baptized. even in John the Baptists' day his message was that the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand, and he preached that Jesus was coming soon. People believed, and they were baptized.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2019
8,360
2,623
Redacted
✟268,970.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Only a protestant could say that, someone who ignore what the scriptures say about baptism and substitutes their doctrine in the place of holy scripture. None of the ancient churches can agree to that opinion because it is unbiblical.

immersion/submersion is not stipulated in scripture so it is unbiblical. But it is not anti-biblical any more than pouring water over the head is.

infant baptism and believers baptism are both biblical.
Infant baptism is not at all biblical.. The households were preached to first they believed THEN they were baptized.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.