Paedo/Creedo Baptism

[brightlights]

I actually don't yet have a position. I'm a defacto creedo baptist because I have not baptized my children. But I'd like to propose a formal debate on the issue and I'd like to defend the paedo baptist position. My position will be that the children of believers should be baptized and admitted into membership of the church. The reason I want to defend this position is to see if it's defensible and try to come to some of my own conclusions. Anyone interested?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I'll promote this in GT for you.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Promotion thread here: Formal Debate - We need someone to debate the sacraments...

 

[Keachian]

I will be willing to take up the Credo-Baptist side

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I will draft the stipulations and post them here for you two to review; possibly this evening.

 

[brightlights]

I will be willing to take up the Credo-Baptist side

Sounds good. I look forward to a fruitful discussion.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

1. Title and Topic: Paedo vs. Credo Baptism
2. brightlights will be arguing that Paedo Baptism is theologically correct; Keachian will be arguing that Credo Baptism is the correct theological interpretation.
3. There will be three alternating rounds for a total of 6 posts.
4. brightlights will begin, with Keachian replying.
5. The size of post will be limited by the size allowed by the software for a single post.
6. Time limit for response is one week from the time that the previous post is approved and becomes visible.
7. Quotes and outside references are allowed. Please note that all quotes will fall under the 20% copyright rule.
8. The start date of the debate.
9. A Peanut Gallery thread will be started in the General Theology Forum for those members not in the formal debate to discuss both the topic and the debate.

Please look these over, and if there are any additions or modifications required, now's the time.


Thanks,


Mark

 

[Keachian]

Not that I will be needing it but does the 20% apply to works that have gone out of copyright?

And if we're still doing the multi peanut galleries I would suggest Baptist, Presby and Reformed as well maybe

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Not that I will be needing it but does the 20% apply to works that have gone out of copyright?

And if we're still doing the multi peanut galleries I would suggest Baptist, Presby and Reformed as well maybe

If something is in the public domain, no. I'm not sure about laws elsewhere, but here in Canada, as long as there exists someone to hold a copyright, the copyright never expires.

 

[Keachian]

If something is in the public domain, no. I'm not sure about laws elsewhere, but here in Canada, as long as there exists someone to hold a copyright, the copyright never expires.

I'd be talking 17th Century works by our theological forbears, not really sure it will be necessary, but it is quite interesting a topic in Historical Theology, well to me anyway.

 

[brightlights]

Sounds good. MarkRohfrietsch will you be creating the debate thread? I can have my first post prepared by Monday.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I'd be talking 17th Century works by our theological forbears, not really sure it will be necessary, but it is quite interesting a topic in Historical Theology, well to me anyway.

Sounds good. MarkRohfrietsch will you be creating the debate thread? I can have my first post prepared by Monday.

I too enjoy this historic stuff.

Most of the 17th. cent stuff is in the public domain, however publications and translations may be copyrighted by publishers or Churches. It is good to check.

I have created the debate thread with a link to the peanut gallery here: http://www.christianforums.com/t7827475/#post65808958

I'm closing the proposal thread; please enjoy your debate.

Blessings and peace,

Mark