Getting Water Baptized Twice?

[shturt678]

Believed and baptized is a sequence of events. Belief saves and baptism shows that salvation. Note that the only requirement to be condemned is to not believe, not to not be baptized. Thus belief alone saves, in Christ's logic.

Vivified at one's "instant of faith" before water baptism. Since water baptism takes place in the sphere of the Name (revelation) of the Triune God hence water baptism is pure Gospel and by no means a legal rite - although I accept water baptism called an "ordinance" (Matt.28:19) - ergo "regenerated" at one's water baptism, including those little tiny bald headed guilty infants that believe in Jesus - just out of the womb.

 

[Rev Randy]

Believed and baptized is a sequence of events. Belief saves and baptism shows that salvation. Note that the only requirement to be condemned is to not believe, not to not be baptized. Thus belief alone saves, in Christ's logic.

Except Christ did not say that.Pteriax did. Who cares what it takes to be damned. I have no interest in being damned.
Now exactly what did Peter say baptism was for?(Acts 2:38) A sign? Nope. The remission of sins? And what shall you receive with it?(same verse)
Now if you can point me to the verse that says "baptism is but an outward sign of an inward belief", this old bald fat man will do a backflip for ya.

 

[Rev Randy]

Vivified at one's "instant of faith" before water baptism. Since water baptism takes place in the sphere of the Name (revelation) of the Triune God hence water baptism is pure Gospel and by no means a legal rite - although I accept water baptism called an "ordinance" (Matt.28:19) - ergo "regenerated" at one's water baptism, including those little tiny bald headed guilty infants that believe in Jesus - just out of the womb.

Funny. I had hair as an infant. A lot of hair. Now I still have hair but an extremely long forehead that goes to the crown of my head. Apparently there's enough room for another face. My daughter drew me one once. With a sharpie. Took some good buffing to remove it.

 

[bornofGod888]

Now if you can point me to the verse that says "baptism is but an outward sign of an inward belief", this old bald fat man will do a backflip for ya.

"But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you." - Romans 6:17

Contextually, Paul had just finished speaking about baptism. Unless it is "obeyed from the heart", something that no newborn infant could ever do, it means nothing.

Anyhow, see if you can film your backflip and then upload it to YouTube. Personally, I'd like to see it. Thanks.

 

[Rev Randy]

"But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you." - Romans 6:17

Contextually, Paul had just finished speaking about baptism. Unless it is "obeyed from the heart", something that no newborn infant could ever do, it means nothing.

Anyhow, see if you can film your backflip and then upload it to YouTube. Personally, I'd like to see it. Thanks.

If that were even close i'd film it and post it. it would not be pretty. It was a good try so I did a little moonwalk.

 

[Rev Randy]

Never mind.

 

[bornofGod888]

If that were even close i'd film it and post it. it would not be pretty. It was a good try so I did a little moonwalk.

It was better than "a good try". Anyhow, seeing how I've already witnessed so much "scriptural gymnastics" from you and others around here, I'll be just fine without the YouTube clip.

Good night.

 

[Rev Randy]

It was better than "a good try". Anyhow, seeing how I've already witnessed so much "scriptural gymnastics" from you and others around here, I'll be just fine without the YouTube clip.

Good night.

Sleep well.

 

[shturt678]

"But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you." - Romans 6:17

Contextually, Paul had just finished speaking about baptism. Unless it is "obeyed from the heart", something that no newborn infant could ever do, it means nothing.

Missed Rom.6:3, 4 along with Paul discussing the newness of life and sanctification, ie, Rom.6:17. btw infants sanctified at their water baptism - by God's Spirit, infant's spirit sanctified.

Anyhow, see if you can film your backflip and then upload it to YouTube. Personally, I'd like to see it. Thanks.

 

[Thekla]

I meant biblical in a boarder sense. That which is proper and true doctrine. I should have been clearer.

Apparently we do not fully share interpretations of the Holy Scriptures on this matter (and thus what is proper and true doctrine).

I also do not consider Scripture to be a full praxis manual - in fact, the epistles were addressed to existing Churches that were already founded and instructed on praxis.

 

[Thekla]

In Churches that do not permit the baptism of infants and do give communion, in the interest of consistency of praxis reflecting doctrine: are pregnant and nursing women refused communion ?

 

[Crandaddy]

In Churches that do not permit the baptism of infants and do give communion, in the interest of consistency of praxis reflecting doctrine: are pregnant and nursing women refused communion ?

I don't know of any church that rejects paedobaptism that is not also Zwinglian in its Eucharistology.

 

[shturt678]

Funny. I had hair as an infant. A lot of hair. Now I still have hair but an extremely long forehead that goes to the crown of my head. Apparently there's enough room for another face. My daughter drew me one once. With a sharpie. Took some good buffing to remove it.

I've splashed, not a lot, of infants with a little hair to a lot. Was using 'bald' as a more of a rhetorical device, ie, been learning from you my friend Randy. Your 'baptizer' picture even reflects that even your person is even buff. Now looks and personality, hard to beat me? - Oh, wait - that deception again, along with illusions, ie, age and mileage thing.

 

[Jig]

I don't know of any church that rejects paedobaptism that is not also Zwinglian in its Eucharistology.

I don't know of any church that accepts paedobaptism that is not also heavily invested in traditionalism.

Let's face it, without the traditional practice of infant baptism (and using solely the Bible for baptismal instruction), not many churches would subscribe to infant baptism.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I don't know of any church that accepts paedobaptism that is not also heavily invested in traditionalism.

Let's face it, without the traditional practice of infant baptism (and using solely the Bible for baptismal instruction), not many churches would subscribe to infant baptism.

Truth is that the majority of Christians do!

 

[Jig]

Truth is that the majority of Christians do!

Logical fallacy: appeal to popularity

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Logical fallacy: appeal to popularity

No fallacy; fact. Numerically this practice continues to this day, not because it's wrong BTW.

There is nothing wrong with Adult baptism, but if it's being done as a profession of faith, recite the Creed; it's dryer. If it's a means of grace, and Scripture does not forbid it, then withholding it from infants and Children is a sin.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

In Churches that do not permit the baptism of infants and do give communion, in the interest of consistency of praxis reflecting doctrine: are pregnant and nursing women refused communion ?

Since these guys don't believe in the efficacy of grace in the sacraments; from their POV, it should not matter.

Should not worry about alcohol either, as most of them use grape juice too.

 

[Jig]

No fallacy; fact. Numerically this practice continues to this day, not because it's wrong BTW.

That doesn't mean its biblical.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

That doesn't mean its biblical.

Neither does it mean that it's not. Scripture neither forbids it, nor does it conflict with Scripture.

Telling a Lutheran something they do isn't "biblical" has got to be one of the most ridiculous things I've seen in a while.

I guess John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli were not very "biblical" either. Nor Jon Hus for that matter...

Anglicans and Methodists are good with it too!