MacArthur vs Sproul Baptism Debate

[BBAS 64]

MacArthur vs Sproul Baptism Debate

If You have not heard or seen it…..

 

[JM]

Classic.

James White vs. Bill Shishko was good but White is weak on 1689 Federalism and often agrees with Shishko weakening his position.

For the Eastern Orthodox view check out the following link. This is the weakest argument for infant baptism I have ever heard.

Orthodoxy and Baptism

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[BOW2me]

MacArthur vs Sproul Baptism Debate

If You have not heard or seen it…..

At approx. 1:36:27 Sproul says the baptism needs to be explained to the baptized individual and if they accept the promise of God, they will be saved.

My understanding of Lutheran doctrine is the God's grace is imparted to the individual through the waters of baptism resulting in them becoming a child of God. Could it be that Sproul is confused? Weather of not he is confused, his explanation of the effects of infant baptism are confusing - at least to me.

What We Believe – WELS
The Bible and Lutherans teach that baptism is a holy act. It is instituted by God. Using water and God’s Word it offers and gives the forgiveness of sins, spiritual life, and eternal salvation. It is meant for young and old, including children. Infants also are sinful and therefore need the spiritual rebirth brought about through baptism.

(Luk 23:43 KJV) And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

The thief was not baptized.

 

[Dan Perez]

At approx. 1:36:27 Sproul says the baptism needs to be explained to the baptized individual and if they accept the promise of God, they will be saved.

My understanding of Lutheran doctrine is the God's grace is imparted to the individual through the waters of baptism resulting in them becoming a child of God. Could it be that Sproul is confused? Weather of not he is confused, his explanation of the effects of infant baptism are confusing - at least to me.

What We Believe – WELS
The Bible and Lutherans teach that baptism is a holy act. It is instituted by God. Using water and God’s Word it offers and gives the forgiveness of sins, spiritual life, and eternal salvation. It is meant for young and old, including children. Infants also are sinful and therefore need the spiritual rebirth brought about through baptism.

(Luk 23:43 KJV) And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

The thief was not baptized.

I was a SO BAPTIST for ten years and have a question for those who believe in water Baptism .

#1 Jesus came to Jesus and in Matt 3:13 Jesus came to JOHN to be baptized of him .

#2 And in verse 14 John forbad him and said , I have need to be BAPTIZED of thee .

# 3 And Jesus answering said unto him , for thus it becometh us to FUFIL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS .

And what does FULFIL ALL RIGHTEOUSS , mean ?

# 4 Acts 2:38 Peter says to REPENT and be BAPTIZED in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiven of SINS , and yo will receive the GIFT of the HOLY SPIRIT .

# 5 Read Gen 6:6 and see if Christ ever REPENTED ?


#6 So why did Jesus need to be water BAPTIZE ?


#7 All priests that ministered in the TEMPLE had to WASH , hands and FEET , BEFORE entering temple and minister before GOD ., Ex 19:6 .

#8 In the MILLENNIAL KINGDOM all male Jews will be Kings and PRIESTS , Rev 1:6 and EX 19:6 .

#9 Christ will be the HIGH PRIEST after the ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC and minister in the MILLENNIAL KINGDOM .

dan p

#

 

[JSRG]

At approx. 1:36:27 Sproul says the baptism needs to be explained to the baptized individual and if they accept the promise of God, they will be saved.

My understanding of Lutheran doctrine is the God's grace is imparted to the individual through the waters of baptism resulting in them becoming a child of God. Could it be that Sproul is confused? Weather of not he is confused, his explanation of the effects of infant baptism are confusing - at least to me.

What We Believe – WELS
The Bible and Lutherans teach that baptism is a holy act. It is instituted by God. Using water and God’s Word it offers and gives the forgiveness of sins, spiritual life, and eternal salvation. It is meant for young and old, including children. Infants also are sinful and therefore need the spiritual rebirth brought about through baptism.

(Luk 23:43 KJV) And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

The thief was not baptized.

R.C. Sproul wasn't a Lutheran; he was a Calvinist. Specifically, he was an ordained pastor in the Presbyterian Church in America.

 

[Indybap]

At approx. 1:36:27 Sproul says the baptism needs to be explained to the baptized individual and if they accept the promise of God, they will be saved.

My understanding of Lutheran doctrine is the God's grace is imparted to the individual through the waters of baptism resulting in them becoming a child of God. Could it be that Sproul is confused? Weather of not he is confused, his explanation of the effects of infant baptism are confusing - at least to me.

What We Believe – WELS
The Bible and Lutherans teach that baptism is a holy act. It is instituted by God. Using water and God’s Word it offers and gives the forgiveness of sins, spiritual life, and eternal salvation. It is meant for young and old, including children. Infants also are sinful and therefore need the spiritual rebirth brought about through baptism.

(Luk 23:43 KJV) And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

The thief was not baptized.

Hello, im Mike, from New Zealand. I go to an independent baptist church. Looking at scripture, baptism has different forms.. but I never see it attached to receiving eternal life from Jesus.

Acts 2:38.. being baptised for the remission of sins... 'for' is 'eis' in the Greek. This is like 'in reference to' 'because of' 'in regards to'

So it's being baptised by immersion because of an individual already having been given remission of sins at salvation.

 

[JM]

I never could accept the Reformed argument for paedobaptism but have, after many years of struggle have come to accept paedobaptism and baptismal regeneration.

 

[Indybap]

I never could accept the Reformed argument for paedobaptism but have, after many years of struggle have come to accept paedobaptism and baptismal regeneration.

So, where would you find pedobaptism in scripture?

 

[JM]

So, where would you find pedobaptism in scripture?

I can't argue in this forum I am no longer a Baptist (after 20 years) and I'm not prepared to really but I will answer your question. For me the issue is one of scriptural totality, what the church has always taught and what the early church wrote about baptism. One quick scripture that comes to mind is Matthew 28.

"All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

Who is in charge of heaven and earth right now?

Jesus.

Where are we to go?

Into all nations.

What are we do to?

Make disciples.

How does one make disciples?

By baptism in the Triune name and by catechism/teaching.

Who can be a disciple?

All nations. Not adults only but all in that nation.

Yours in the Lord,

jm