Hooray!

[Erinwilcox]

Ohhh a club! I want to join!?!?!?!?!

You sure you want to throw your lot in with us? I mean, today is the day that we are condemned!

 

[cubanito]

You must understand the Covenental hermeneutics. Whatever is inconvenient is Spiritual in nature. So yee shall burn in effigy, but a quick re-baptism can put out the fire. Unless, of course, yee have partaken overly of the sacramental beverages...

JR

 

[Erinwilcox]

You must understand the Covenental hermeneutics. Whatever is inconvenient is Spiritual in nature. So yee shall burn in effigy, but a quick re-baptism can put out the fire. Unless, of course, yee have partaken overly of the sacramental beverages...

JR

A quick re-baptism? :cough: it sounds to me as if you'll be burned with the four of us! Uh, I've already been baptized twice, as many of you know (if you've read my testimony here in SR, I think it explains there)--unusual circumstances--would you condemn me further by making it three? And how exactly would a few drops of water put out the raging fire? Wouldn't it take a lot more water (like the amout we Baptists use? )?!

 

[cubanito]

Yee misunderstand, as yee know not the Power of the Session nor the Flexibility of Covenental Hermeneutics. As we wit sprinkles but droplets of efficacious fluid, a "burning at the stake" needs but a wee match waved ceremoniously, but with much gravity, near thy utterly depraved flesh, thou rotten maggot!

We in our beneficience understand yer need for many litre of what is weakly efficacious fluid, giver yer wee small capacity to sanctify the Element of the Blessed Sacrament of Baptism. As our solemn ordained ministries cast but drops of Elemental Hydronium Ionic Matter at an infant to gain, yeah indeed much surpass, yer much repeated litre of diluted efficaciousness. Indeed yer process begins at infancy with "dedication" services, and is oft repeated to obtain the efficacy of the meanest servant of our Elect Ministers at but a gesture. Such is the potency of our solemn assemblies!

Thus special dispensation may begged be at our Presbytery for yee Slushy (semi-frozen) Chosen to continue thy public bathing.

JR

BTW There shall be no further "hee-hees" or "smilies" tolerated. Yee be warned, conduct thyselfs accordingly.

 

[Erinwilcox]

Yee dinna sayee. Well, then, I asketh yee who are condemned with mee to answer the afore mentioned script as yee thinketh wisest. I didna hee hee.

 

[Calvinist Dark Lord]

Yee dinna sayee. Well, then, I asketh yee who are condemned with mee to answer the afore mentioned script as yee thinketh wisest. I didna hee hee.

Just a second lass...i'm the Scot here!!!

i'd say that we Scots have nae sense of humour, but in light of the fact (pun intended!) that i started this burning thingy, you'd know that's a lie.

It's no serious offense though, i'm what would be called "border trash" (sort of like American Trailer trash, but not as cultured). We're not what one thinks of when Scots are mentioned. Of course you could ask many an English (spit!) invader what they think of the border Scots...those few who survived the experience.

i am pleased to see that my little humerous diversion carried on without me. And they say we Calvinists are such a dour lot.

Interestingly enough, i too was baptised twice. Once as an infant in a Methodist Church, which i wasn't aware of until many years later. The second was in a cow pond at a large Jesus Festival near Mercer, Pennsylvania way back when i was a few years older than you. Sometimes i miss those doctrinally ignorant days...then i take two aspirin, and lay down until that feeling goes away.

Those of us not born into the Reformed Faith do have some stories to tell, some best forgotten.

 

[lmnop9876]

A quick re-baptism? :cough: it sounds to me as if you'll be burned with the four of us! Uh, I've already been baptized twice, as many of you know (if you've read my testimony here in SR, I think it explains there)--unusual circumstances--would you condemn me further by making it three? And how exactly would a few drops of water put out the raging fire? Wouldn't it take a lot more water (like the amout we Baptists use? )?!

twice baptized? twice burned.
i'll never have to face the problem, i was baptized at 7, the baptists can't burn me and the paedobaptists can't burn me.
although the baptists would have more of a case than the paedo's, cos my dad had me baptized (along with my 6 other brothers and sisters at the time down to 2 months old.)
and you'll never catch me being baptized again...
"one baptism in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit for the remission of sins."
one more thing...
it was by pouring, and the amount of water maketh none difference unto the efficacy of the sacrament.

 

[bradfordl]

Yep, it's a sad thing to be born outside of the covenant family.... "consecrated" by the Methodists as an infant, dunked in the Pacific ocean by the Jesus People, and finally dunked again by a Nazarene pastor who convinced me the first 2 didn't take. Only by God's grace I wasn't drowned. Then I read a little book called "Chosen by God". Whew! What a relief!

Needless to say, all 4 of my progeny have been properly sprinkled as soon after birth as possible.

 

[Erinwilcox]

Well, depending on how you look at it, I was born iinto a family of the covenant (a Baptist family, albeit) and it still happened somehow. But for those of you who've heard my testimony, you know that it was my choice to be baptized the second time because I was unsure of my spiritual state during the first baptism in '96 (man, it's really been ten years since then!). . .you also know that Baptists have a different view of baptism...need I explain now? I need to go to work!

Seeing how it is now THURSDAY, ya'll will have to wait another week before condemning us!

 

[cubanito]

purity of heart beats doctrinal knowledge every time. While its best to have both,

 

[Erinwilcox]

purity of heart beats doctrinal knowledge every time. While its best to have both,

So yours is more pure than mine since YOU are a paedobaptist and I am not? (just to inform you, that wee face on your screen is not a "hee hee" or a smiling thingy, rather, it is sticking it's tongue out!)

Yikes! Is this post going to be used against me as evidence?

 

[lmnop9876]

Well, depending on how you look at it, I was born iinto a family of the covenant (a Baptist family, albeit) and it still happened somehow. But for those of you who've heard my testimony, you know that it was my choice to be baptized the second time because I was unsure of my spiritual state during the first baptism in '96 (man, it's really been ten years since then!). . .you also know that Baptists have a different view of baptism...need I explain now? I need to go to work!

Seeing how it is now THURSDAY, ya'll will have to wait another week before condemning us!

baptism don't depend on your spiritual state (or your own knowledge of your spiritual state) but on the promise of God, given to us in the washing with water in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
an aside...
how i see baptism...
circumcision was the sign and seal of the covenant in the OT
baptism replaces circumcision
therefore, baptism is the sign and seal of the covenant in the NT

circumcision was given to children
baptism replaces circumcision
therefore, baptism is given to children

 

[Erinwilcox]

how i see baptism...
circumcision was the sign and seal of the covenant in the OT
baptism replaces circumcision
therefore, baptism is the sign and seal of the covenant in the NT

circumcision was given to children
baptism replaces circumcision
therefore, baptism is given to children

Except that little girls weren't baptized. . .

But that is beside the point. Baptists generally believe that baptism is a sign, a symbol--in other words, when one confesses Christ, he is baptized to signify that he has been made new--it is a public profession of faith. We believe that when the Bible says, "Believe and be baptized," that salvation must come first, then baptism, which is done in obedience to Christ. We do not believe that it has any saving power, but rather that it is an outward sign of an inward reality.

 

[lmnop9876]

Except that little girls weren't baptized. . .

But that is beside the point. Baptists generally believe that baptism is a sign, a symbol--in other words, when one confesses Christ, he is baptized to signify that he has been made new--it is a public profession of faith. We believe that when the Bible says, "Believe and be baptized," that salvation must come first, then baptism, which is done in obedience to Christ. We do not believe that it has any saving power, but rather that it is an outward sign of an inward reality.

little girls may have been baptized (they were definitely baptized unto Moses in the cloud and the sea in the OT), but they weren't circumcised (for obvious reasons).
baptism is said to save us, to wash away our sins, to regenerate us, &c. &c. we can't ignore these passages. baptism is more than a sign, it also seals and applies the benefits of Christ's work to believers. even if we don't believe at the time of baptism, yet it still promises these things to us if and when we do believe.

 

[lmnop9876]

but anyway, let's not take away from the fact that this is supposed to be a celebration of the anniversary of Erin's SECOND baptism (do you remember the date of the first, valid, baptism, so we can celebrate that too? ) or was that not in the Name of the Holy Trinity? only kidding.

 

[Erinwilcox]

I meant circumcized--my point only was that if baptism is the replacement for circumcism, then why are the recipients different now?

Any how, I do remember the date of the first baptism. It was Sept. (pretty sure it was the 6th) 6, 1996. But, I'm not sure that it was "valid" as you say since I don't know that there was any inward reality to correspond with the outward sign.

 

[Paleoconservatarian]

Those of us not born into the Reformed Faith do have some stories to tell, some best forgotten.

Speaking of stories best forgotten.... might I recommend to the re-baptizing heretics out there, that they remember to bring spare underpants when they take the plunge.

 

[lmnop9876]

I meant circumcized--my point only was that if baptism is the replacement for circumcism, then why are the recipients different now?

Any how, I do remember the date of the first baptism. It was Sept. (pretty sure it was the 6th) 6, 1996. But, I'm not sure that it was "valid" as you say since I don't know that there was any inward reality to correspond with the outward sign.

i have yet to see the Scripture that says anything about "outward sign & inward reality." any baptism performed with water in the Name of the Holy Trinity by a Christian Church is valid. if it were the case that you had to have a full assurance of your faith to be baptized, then you would have to go back and be rebaptized every time you backslid and lost your assurance of faith.
neway, i'll make a note in my diary (if only i had one!) to start a celebration thread for the 10-year anniversary of your receiving of the one baptism for the remission of sins.
but, as is often the case, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[cubanito]

Oh bother, what was a happy carefree thread is turning serious. Well, for the record, just as I am a commited Calvarminian, I am also solidly behind the proposition that the Scripture is insufficiently clear on the paedobaptism vs believer's baptism to be digmatic. That is not fence sitting, rather I would vigorously defend the position that Scripture is unclear on this.

I would also say that SOME physical form of baptism IS mandated whenever possible, so I'm not with the Quakers.

JR

 

[Erinwilcox]

Speaking of stories best forgotten.... might I recommend to the re-baptizing heretics out there, that they remember to bring spare underpants when they take the plunge.

Maybe it was a judgement, a punishment, a sign--since you would soon find that you liked sprinkling infants better, you'd be embarrased for getting dunked as a young adult! Or maybe it was a sign that you'd soon be burned in this thread for having that type of baptism in the first place!

Don't mind me, anyone. . .I just have a wild imagination (a co-worker that I barely knew asked me the other day if I acted--from the way I was gesticulating and speaking, she was sure that I must act...and I'm called a drama queen, etc.) and enjoy using once and a while!

See where the fire is centralized? That is where the stake is...unfortunately, the picture doesn't show the ring of paedos dancing and chanting the death song around the ring of heretics. . . Too bad. . .