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.
Babies are a part of the household.So our baptism is not like Jesus. Where is it stated that "christian baptism includes babies?
:oBecause an act is a work.
The work of choosing salvation is just that, a work.
-CryptoLutheran
Babies are a part of the household.
13 And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them, and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them, Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. 15 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.
Yes, I see baptism as a part of that. Did I see the word "baptism"? No. But I see it in this verse speaking of the same "Coming to Christ".Did you see baptism in there? I did not. Children were always dedicated to God. Jesus blessed them but not even Jesus was baptized as a child. Yes commit children unto God but baptism is for the persons to do as a sign of their own commitment/decision to serve God when their are able to make such a choice.
Yes, I see baptism as a part of that. Did I see the word "baptism"? No. But I see it in this verse speaking of the same "Coming to Christ".
And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family.
Did he have children if so how many children did he have? How old were they?
You do realize that you have treated this account in support of baptizing babies when no mention is made of such in the passage. May whole family consist of person over 20. Who says that his whole did not consist of all persons over 25, or 30? Is that out of the question?
And you doing the same. How do you know there were not seven newborns in the house.The KJV says :
Matthew 19:14
King James Version (KJV)
14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children,and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
Now I'm aware you do not see baptism as coming to Christ. I do.
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
I'm not concerned that a babe of mine isn't able to grasp the "believe " part. I'll teach them that from a newborn until they leave the house. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
Now I'll toss something right back at you. Show me in scripture where it's even alluded to as being wrong to baptize the little ones.
Why did the Hebrew circumcise infants? One reason was because of command. Do you know the other reason? The main reason. Should they not have waited until the child was old enough to understand? Better yet until they could make the decision on their own?
It's clear we have differing mindsets. Here is mine:
I decide for my little child as that is my duty. I will teach that Child as that is my duty. But my faith is not in my teaching. I have faith that God will finish the work He began concerning faith. With my little one that began at Baptism. I am not of the school that a child has a right to choose whether or not to be a Christian. A little one should not be given choices like that in a Christian home. If we can cause a little one to believe in Santa and the tooth fairy, Christ (the Truth) should not be that difficult. You do realize that parents and even replacement parents are charged with teaching the child the Way at the Baptism, aren't you.
And if it's just symbolic as so many say, why does it concern those who say such?Apparently they see it as something more than they admit to.
I see.
But how is everyone not saved if God desires it?
Since you say that humans are wholly passive in salvation; receiving without acting, like a dead body receives. Becoming alive only when God gives life (presumably eternal life).
And if there is any element of human action, like rejecting the offered salvation or accepting it, then aren't you really a synergist according to your previous statements?
Did you see baptism in there? I did not. Children were always dedicated to God. Jesus blessed them but not even Jesus was baptized as a child.
Dear friend and brother in the Lord,
I reckon that we depend on God wholly for everything.
Saint Paul said "in him we live and move and have our being".
That Paul chap was such a philosopher-theologian at times!
Anyway, God gives us graces, gifts if you will, and we respond by making good or not good use of them.
For example, God gives us life and we respond by living either a good life or a bad one.
Now most of us will admit we live a pretty second rate, rather bad, life even if we wish we were living otherwise.
"most of us" are not even in the Kingdom of God, thinking we are of course, eg, Matt.20:1-16 & 22:1-14, wouldn't you agree?
.And we all, I reckon, will admit to God that we didn't do anything more than he wanted from us even if we were pretty much perfect.
Yet so few of us have been perfect in that way.
So, nearly all of us will stand before God in need of mercy because we totally messed everything up.
That's where one more grace comes in, it's the biggest and best grace, because it is Jesus Christ.
God gives us Jesus and we do not deserve him.
God calls us to believe and gives grace to believe and we respond by either believing or not
That's where another very ancient and totally universal grace from God comes in.
Universal atonement, yes. Sola gratia, yes. "universal grace," no. Grace has always had its limits, eg, Matt.11, 14.
God gives us freedom to use or misuse his gifts.
Do you agree?
Hey, I agree in spirit of your coherent response, but have to disagree, only to a degree this time, to the letter of your letter.
Whoops!
I ought to have written the above in a different thread!
This one is about baptism!
In compliance due to "Infant baptism" with these precious little ones depend on their parents and God for everything, providing in the Kingdom, ie, "in or not in" the Kingdom is the 400 pound gorilla in the room Having Kona Coffee with you this morning.
And most of us receive baptism quite passively as babies!
Most of us today either receive a spiritual baptismal rebirth or a water baptism in "another Name" hence invalid, ie, thinking it's valid of course due to IIThess.2:9-12 & Rev.13:14b.
Aint that grand! God comes to us when we're helpless.
Just like saint Paul said, Romans 5:6 When we were still helpless, at the appointed time, Christ died for the godless.
I value your fellowship and friendship hence went easy on your words, enjoying Kona coffee with your person KonaCoffe, oh, sorry, MoreCoffee.
Please show me scripture that we are to wait for our children to understand. You have none. You say that about baptism not because of scripture but because you've been taught that by men. Do you know when baptising children began and when some began questioning it? I assure you that Martian Luther did not object and that was not listed in his complaints. So the problem with it began after not in the reformation. It's a new concept.You must realize that I agree with you in teaching and taking advantish of all the time that we have in enlightening our children about God. Duet. 11: And ye shall teach them your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. We who call ourselves Christians are failing miserably in this area.
Baptism nevertheless is for when the child now says I accept what you have taught me and I am making my own decision to follow God, I will get baptize. Getting a little baby baptize does not mean that we secure then in Christ. When they make that decision themselves says that they have personally accepted Jesus that is of great importance. God requires personal decisive commitment and baptism is the sign of that.
Double predestination posits that God chooses the elect to salvation, and passes over the reprobate, thus there is a segment of the human population that was born to be damned, without hope of salvation.
Lutherans believe Christ died for everyone, and that God desires everyone to be saved. Everyone means everyone. Nobody is passed over, the Gospel goes out to all, for all, and it has the power to save all.
-CryptoLutheran
I see.
But how is everyone not saved if God desires it?
Because we reject it, it's what we do best.
We can reject it, and we most often do. We're sinners, and our natural disposition is to reject God, to flee from Him in our guilt, in our shame, in our sin. That's what sinners do. That's why grace is a radical thing, it declares us, rebellious lot that we are, children; and not only says that, but does that, for us.Since you say that humans are wholly passive in salvation; receiving without acting, like a dead body receives. Becoming alive only when God gives life (presumably eternal life).
And if there is any element of human action, like rejecting the offered salvation or accepting it, then aren't you really a synergist according to your previous statements?
The will is active, our will being sinful and dead in sin, does act, but its action is to turn away from God, to reject Him. That's what natural, sinful human works do, it's what a sinful human will does.
That's why we need grace. Grace doesn't wait for us to offer our yes, grace comes with God's yes to and for us, and struggle though we will, grace acts upon us anyway.Since you say that humans are wholly passive in salvation; receiving without acting, like a dead body receives. Becoming alive only when God gives life (presumably eternal life).
And if there is any element of human action, like rejecting the offered salvation or accepting it, then aren't you really a synergist according to your previous statements?
Why then are some saved and not others? Good question.
Lutherans call this the Crux Theologorum, the Theologian's Cross. The most frustrating and unanswerable question of theology. It's a paradox that we can't solve. When we try to answer it, we are usually left with rejecting one part of Scripture or the other. Calvinism is one error in trying to resolve the paradox, by saying Christ died only for the elect; Arminianism is the other error in trying to resolve the paradox, by saying that human beings contribute their share to God's work in salvation. Lutheranism rejects both, and asserts the paradox is a paradox, and it's not our business to resolve it because, this side of eternity, it can't be resolved. Only God in His infinite and Divine wisdom knows how it all works out, and that should be sufficient for us to trust Him.
-CryptoLutheran
Dead folk, like dead wills, do not DO anything. They no more reject than they accept. They are inert - except for decaying because of the activity of living things that feed on the corpse.
So, how does a dead will reject?
I do not believe that a fallen person has a deceased will.
Do you?
Okay.
We do need grace.
Catholics see the grace starting at conception or earlier.
Not along the lines of " By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death." that gets a mention in the Westminster Confession of Faith.
But along the lines of saint Paul's declaration, "it is [God] who gives everything -- including life and breath -- to everyone. ... it is in him that we live, and move, and exist, as indeed some of your own writers have said: We are all his children. "
There is in Paul's declaration a surprising element of a pre-existing relationship between God and humanity.
One that gets scant attention at times.
We are, by nature, God's children. And sin makes us run & hide from God, as did Adam and Eve, "[Adam and Eve] heard the sound of Yahweh God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from Yahweh God among the trees of the garden"
Even in their fallen state they acted with freedom, but their fall made them fearful of their Father.
That is the tragedy of sin. Other tragic elements also exist.
So how did God dress their wound? [puns intended]
I presume, as you would expect, that they were not yet dead, that their death would take time and would not become irrevocable until their life on Earth ran its course.
Yahweh God made tunics of skins for the man and his wife and clothed them.
The above is a little symbolic I reckon, covering their nudity with animal skins seems like a reference to sacrificial animals that would come into the story later (with Cain & Able then with Noah and then with Abraham and Moses and Israel and finally with Jesus Christ).
There's always grace in their lives as long as they live (on Earth).
There's always freedom as long as they are alive.
Freedom to choose and freedom to refuse.
And there's always mystery in grace.
God reveals it, but he does not always explain every detail.
So the mystery is both in the fact of revealing and in the absence of detailed explanation.
It is not until Jesus comes that detailed explanation arrives.
But it arrives as a person not as scripture.
So, Catholic theology is happy to admit mystery (in the sense of revealed truth that does not contain - in scripture - all the details and hence is a little bit misty (pun intended)).
Freedom is our birth right. It is included in the deal. It is part of our created nature.
Responsibility is predicated on freedom.
If we acted without freedom - by instinct, for example - then we would be blameless. Just as other creatures are blameless when acting without freedom.
Hmmm .. maybe I ought to stop. I am writing way more than I intended.
God bless.
There is no account of children in the bible only grown-ups. Show me a baby or even a child that was baptized.Please show me scripture that we are to wait for our children to understand. You have none. You say that about baptism not because of scripture but because you've been taught that by men. Do you know when baptising children began and when some began questioning it? I assure you that Martian Luther did not object and that was not listed in his complaints. So the problem with it began after not in the reformation. It's a new concept.
There is no account of children in the bible only grown-ups. Show me a baby or even a child that was baptized.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?