Parallels of the old and new Testaments.

[Breetai]

Ahhhh!

1. I do not believe that water, the act of baptism, or both combined does anything for the faith of the infant, it doesn't impart or confirm faith.

I just got into this argument at the seminary! Take it Lotar! *runs away in a panic*

 

[theseed]

2. The obvious thing that I'm going to say about Romans 6 is that you left out being crucified.
Romans 6:6 goes on to say that we were not only buried with him, but also crucified with him. Yet we don't see symbolism of being crucified in the act of baptism by immersion and of believers only.[/QUOTE]

The body is perpendicular to the water, ie makes a cross.

The baptism of an infant testifies to the faith of the parent(s), and is to work in strengthening the faith of all those who are watching the baptism take place. In that they are reminded of their baptisms and are hurled back to think of their own baptism, and if they have been faithful to Christ, who instituted the sign of baptism, therefore causing them to examine themselves.

So, once again, I show that it is a symbol, of the cross and of our being buried with Christ, and raising again. And if it is a symbol of this faith, faith in Christ's propitation, then, it is not for infants who can not express such faith (Romans 10). What we speak is what is in our hearts.

 

[sola fide]

So, once again, I show that it is a symbol, of the cross and of our being buried with Christ, and raising again. And if it is a symbol of this faith, faith in Christ's propitation, then, it is not for infants who can not express such faith (Romans 10). What we speak is what is in our hearts.

How can you say that our bodies being perpindicular to the water make a cross? I've sure never heard that one before. I know what you're trying to say, but the water does not make the shape of a cross.

Besides that there is plenty of sriptural evidence that the preferable method of baptism is not immersion. For example you cited Titus, his is a perfect example if you want to go that route. He said "washing", not "immersing".

And as far as infants professing faith, who says that an infant needs to profess faith to be baptized? The same mandate applies for baptism that applies for circumcision. Believers who have never been baptized need to be baptized and then baptize their children in obedience to God's covenant. That's why Paul ties baptism and circumcision together in Colossians 2. Just as Abraham circumcised Isaac as an infant we should baptize our children. I agree with Lotar in his reasoning in the OP of this thread in that matter, even though I don't agree with the idea that baptism imparts grace or faith.
I believe that baptism is a sign of faith, but that's not all that it is, it is not limited to that by any means. It is first and foremost a sign of God's covenant with His people. And the parents express their faith by being obedient to that covenant.

My last statement is this. Circumcision was a "type" or "shadow" in the Old Testament pointing forward to something in the New. My challenge is for you to show what other than baptism could have fulfilled it.
If you say "circumcision of the heart", you are wrong. This was already happening in Old Testament times, and it is recorded in the Old Testament, therefore it cannot be a New Testament fulfillment. That's where the argument for believer's baptism only fails as far as I'm concerned.

Grace.

Grace.

 

[theseed]

Besides that there is plenty of sriptural evidence that the preferable method of baptism is not immersion. For example you cited Titus, his is a perfect example if you want to go that route. He said "washing", not "immersing".

Why does not wasing equal immersion, washing is a description more than a method of baptism is it
not?

My last statement is this. Circumcision was a "type" or "shadow" in the Old Testament pointing forward to something in the New. My challenge is for you to show what other than baptism could have fulfilled it.

I see not resemblence to baptism and circumcision, your assumption so far is that it was done on infants, but if it was not then ther would be no simularities. A shadow would be like comparing marriage to the church and Christ, not curmcision and baptism, to things that look completely different. Also, a shadow would be the Passover meal vs Christ death on the cross.

Col. 2.11 speaks of the circumcision of Christ, that was not fullfilled in the OT, before we have Christ we are dead in our transgressions. We are buried with Christ in Baptism which you agree with. This is a spiritual baptism, so is ther also a Spiritual Cur curmcison. Baptism and cicurmicision are to different things that relate to the work of Christ, one is not a shadow of the other.

11In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the flesh (sinful nature),[1] not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.
13When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh (sinful nature),[2] God made you[3] alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.[4]

Circumcision symbolizes death, baptism symbolizes death and resurreciton in Christ. Therefore, baptism does not paralell the OT circumsion, but they are 2 different symbols describing inter-related concepts of death. Now, the boldface is just to show that baptism nor circumscion saved, to Lutherans

 

[sola fide]

Deuteronomy 30:6- "And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live."

1. Spritiual circumcision, i.e. the new birth, involves all 3 members of the Godhead. It is caused by the Holy Spirit, but would be pointless without the Father and Son. God has always had to enable people to believe, lest their dead hearts would remain dead.

2. You say you see no resemblance of baptism to circumcision. I remind you that resemblance is not physical, but rather in what the Scriptures say about baptism and circumcision.
Colossians 2 is one example.
Old Testament members of God's visible people received the sign of circumcision. Some of the people who received the sign had faith, others didn't. The sign didn't save them. It was given to show that they were members of God's covenant keeping community. Circumcision, Paul tells us, was a picture of the work that Christ does in the heart of the believer. Circumcision therefore pointed to the work of Christ and the faith of the believer in Him. But it was also applied to the believer's children.
This is an exact picture of baptism.
It is a picture of the very same things- the work of Christ in the heart of the believer by cleansing their heart through the work of the Holy Spirit.

If that's not convincing enough itself, just look at Romans 4 as a perfect example of how circumcision strikingly similar to baptism.
Romans 4:11- "He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised."

That sounds indentical to baptism doesn't it? We are saved by grace through faith in Christ. So was Abraham. He was already justified before he was circumcised. But he was then circumcised in obedience to God's command as a sign and seal (authenticator) of his justification.
That sounds exactly like believers baptism only, does it not?
But the kicker is that Abraham was then commanded to circumcise His son who was just an infant, as the sign of his (Abraham's) faith, in obedience to God's command, and as a sign that Isaac was set apart as a child of the covenant.

1 Corinthians 7:14- "For the unbelieving husband is set apart because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is set apart because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy [i.e. set apart]."

Those who live in households with at least one believing parent are set apart because of God's covenant with that person, for the sake of their children. Paul even says that the children of believers are "holy". That doesn't sound like a Paul-like statement does it? Being that Paul said that there is no one who is righteous. But what does he mean? He means that the children of at least one believing parent are set apart into the covenant community. They are sheltered because their parent is a believer and will raise them in the covenant community and teach them the ways and commands of the Lord. The sign of this being set apart is baptism, because baptism is the sign given to show that someone belongs to the covenant keeping community, i.e. the visible church. Therefore the children of at least one believing parent should be marked as belonging to the church by baptism.
If you concede that baptism is a prerequisite to church membership, then children must be baptized. Just as children were called to be a part of the assembly of the Lord in the O.T. They are numbered as members of the visible church in the N.T. Or else Paul would not have been able to command them- "Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right." - Eph. 6:1
Ephesians was written to the church, the saints, at Ephesus.

3. Why doesn't washing equal immersion? Because typically when washing it involves pouring water upon something. Or else it wouldn't be called washing, but instead dipping or soaking or immersing.

Also, marriage is not a shadow or type, marriage continues on to this day. It was not fulfilled by Christ. Christ is married to His church, but that has always been the case with God and His people, as in Hosea. A "type" is something of the Old Testament that is fulfilled in the New. Marriage would not fall into that category, being that it continues on as the Biblical practice as it always has.

Grace.

 

[theseed]

This is an exact picture of baptism.

Your still assuming that children were baptised, which you can not, and therefore can't prove this statement.

I Like how you brush aside what I said about colossians 2, and are now making a straw man arguement. Colosians 2 is saying that baptism and circumcision are inter-related concepts, but not the same thing which you assert.

If that's not convincing enough itself, just look at Romans 4 as a perfect example of how circumcision strikingly similar to baptism.
Romans 4:11- "He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised."

So what, his rightousness came by faith, where is the part about baptism?

That sounds indentical to baptism doesn't it?

NO!

.

Why doesn't washing equal immersion? Because typically when washing it involves pouring water upon something. Or else it wouldn't be called washing, but instead dipping or soaking or immersing.

It appears that the practice was immersion, and immersion can clean someone just has much as pouring can, if not more, because immersion covers the whole body, for sure.

1 Corinthians 7:14- "For the unbelieving husband is set apart because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is set apart because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy [i.e. set apart]."

But you still have to show that this applies to baptism or circumcison.

The sign of this being set apart is baptism, because baptism is the sign given to show that someone belongs to the covenant keeping community, i.e. the visible church. Therefore the children of at least one believing parent should be marked as belonging to the church by baptism.
If you concede that baptism is a prerequisite to church membership, then children must be baptized. Just as children were called to be a part of the assembly of the Lord in the O.T. They are numbered as members of the visible church in the N.T. Or else Paul would not have been able to command them- "Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right." - Eph. 6:1
Ephesians was written to the church, the saints, at Ephesus.

Where does it say to baptize your children so that they can be set apart? You can't pull scripture out and not show me any context. So far, all I have read is that it children are set apart if the parents believe, and nothing about baptism. You need to show me more.

So far, I have used Col 2. to show that baptism and circumcision are related concepts, and not the same thing. Circumcision is only about the old self dying or being cut off, as Christ was cut off, but baptism is about dying and being buried and rising again with Christ.

 

[theseed]

I'm leaving for the weekend to go on a retreat, but I will be back, and I hope to see some thorough, yet concise arguments about circumcision and baptism and how they are exactly the same, and not just only related concepts. As I said before, baptism was a public sign of repentence. And now for Paul to say there is one baptism could be refering to Holy Spirit baptism and not water baptism.

So far, the argumetns have not been explicit. And I've seen the scripture that allows for infant baptism, but there is nothing explicit. And if John's and Christ's baptism are the same, then we should immerse.

Now, I'm starting to realize that if baptism means an assocation with a group or message, then there are paralells to it. But if baptism is an assocation with the process of salvation then it is not paralell.

Did the Jews baptism their infants, or did Jewish converts baptize thier infants?

FYI: Isreal was not the first nation nor the only nations to circumcise.

 

[theseed]

How can you say that our bodies being perpindicular to the water make a cross? I've sure never heard that one before. I know what you're trying to say, but the water does not make the shape of a cross.

I've read about sacrifices in the OT having cross-shaped aspects.

 

[sola fide]

You conceded that passover was a type of the Lord's supper. Is there an explicit scripture in the N.T. to verify that? The N.T. says that He is our passover lamb, but it doesn't mention the Lord's supper. Same goes with circumcision and baptism (Col. 2).

Grace.

 

[JVAC]

Why does not wasing equal immersion, washing is a description more than a method of baptism is it
not?



I see not resemblence to baptism and circumcision, your assumption so far is that it was done on infants, but if it was not then ther would be no simularities. A shadow would be like comparing marriage to the church and Christ, not curmcision and baptism, to things that look completely different. Also, a shadow would be the Passover meal vs Christ death on the cross.

Col. 2.11 speaks of the circumcision of Christ, that was not fullfilled in the OT, before we have Christ we are dead in our transgressions. We are buried with Christ in Baptism which you agree with. This is a spiritual baptism, so is ther also a Spiritual Cur curmcison. Baptism and cicurmicision are to different things that relate to the work of Christ, one is not a shadow of the other.

11In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the flesh (sinful nature),[1] not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.
13When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh (sinful nature),[2] God made you[3] alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.[4]

Circumcision symbolizes death, baptism symbolizes death and resurreciton in Christ. Therefore, baptism does not paralell the OT circumsion, but they are 2 different symbols describing inter-related concepts of death. Now, the boldface is just to show that baptism nor circumscion saved, to Lutherans

:Enter the Lutheran:

Let us indeed look to Colossians, for here we do learn that it is not a circumcision of human hands, hence baptism is not a circumcision done with human hands. Indeed it tells us that it is the circumcision of Christ. That is the person who does the action, not man but God Incarnate! This passage doesn't eat away at our possition but enforces it.

Through Baptism is given a grace, the grace to be children of God. Let us flip to the Gospel according to St. John 1:12, "Yet all who recieved him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right..." I stop here first to point out one thing, those who recieved him (baptism) and those that then believed (faith); through these things we are then given the next part of the passage, "...to become children of God" That is those baptised believers he gives the right to be God's Children and it goes on with verse 13 "children not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God." Thus the action is not natural, nor is it decisive nor of a human will, but solely, and I do greatly emphasize SOLELY "of God". This is important in the Gospel we just need look further 3:5 "Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh but the Spirit gives birth to spirit."

St. Matthew records in his Gospel of Jesus, 3:16 that as soon as Jesus came out of the water, the heavens were torn, the spirit decended upon him and God himself spake saying "This is my son, with whom I am well pleased." These Graces happened when John baptized, therefore no less should happen when we baptize with Jesus' baptism (Matt 28:19).

God's Grace is in Baptism, for therein lies His Holy Word. Don't trust the water, don't trust the administer, trust only on the Word of God! That is Baptism, God choosing us, giving it to us, so that we might believe in Him, and His promise, that is given thereby!

 

[theseed]

3:5 "Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh but the Spirit gives birth to spirit."

Hi JVAC

And Jesus is the word become flesh, and faith in Christ is what saves, faith that brings us into His grace, and not water nor bread, nor wine. But faith in the propitation on the Cross. (Romans 5.1-2; Romans 10.9-13: Ephes. 2.9-10).


This is talking about water of giving birth, hence, when the water breaks. This verses parallels the other verses of being born from the mothers womb and the flesh

3In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.[1] "
4"How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!"
5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[2] gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You[3] must be born again.' 8The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."


1) born again also means born from above, and John intends this word anonthen (greek) to have both meanings. He is plays on many words

2) we find "born of water" righter after "mothers womb" and before the verse that says being born of the spirit alone brings new birth.

3) Hence, if the new birth is only of the spirit, then baptism (water) does nothing, but Baptism of the Holy Spirit is what brings the new birth.

FYI: I've read The Large Catechism (90%) and The Small Catechism .

St. Matthew records in his Gospel of Jesus, 3:16 that as soon as Jesus came out of the water, the heavens were torn, the spirit decended upon him and God himself spake saying "This is my son, with whom I am well pleased." These Graces happened when John baptized, therefore no less should happen when we baptize with Jesus' baptism (Matt 28:19).

Jesus needs no grace, because he lived without sin (Hebrews). True the Spirit came upon him, after he was baptized, but the Spirit came on the Apostles at Pentecost, and we find there no assocation with water baptism, but only the Spirit being poured out--like when God poured out rain on the earth in the time of Noah.

God's Grace is in Baptism, for therein lies His Holy Word. Don't trust the water, don't trust the administer, trust only on the Word of God! That is Baptism, God choosing us, giving it to us, so that we might believe in Him, and His promise, that is given thereby!

 

[theseed]

You conceded that passover was a type of the Lord's supper. Is there an explicit scripture in the N.T. to verify that? The N.T. says that He is our passover lamb, but it doesn't mention the Lord's supper. Same goes with circumcision and baptism (Col. 2).

Grace.

Poor Sola Fide ,

The Lord's Supper was instituted during passover, and played on the passover ceremony of wine and unleavened bread

 

[theseed]

Ok, Lotar, Sola Fide, and whoever else.

Ok, if you can show me from scripture that baptism is intended to identify Christians with the Church body, and not just Christ, then I will be forced to conced on Lotar's assertion that baptism and cirmucision paralell--that is if I agree with your intrepretation, which, I probobly will, if you can show me this theology systematically.

Think about this, we don't have infants participate in the Lord's Supper.

25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

The purpose of the Lord's Supper is to remember what he did and how he did, and proclaim it that way, which infants can not due, this excludes them.

However, circumcision was a sign that identifed Abrahams descendants with the YHWH, and his children, but is does baptism (water) do this or does it have another purpose according to the Scriptures?

 

[JVAC]

Seed, how was your trip?

Hi JVAC

And Jesus is the word become flesh, and faith in Christ is what saves, faith that brings us into His grace, and not water nor bread, nor wine. But faith in the propitation on the Cross. (Romans 5.1-2; Romans 10.9-13: Ephes. 2.9-10).


This is talking about water of giving birth, hence, when the water breaks. This verses parallels the other verses of being born from the mothers womb and the flesh

3In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.[1] "
4"How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!"
5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[2] gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You[3] must be born again.' 8The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."


1) born again also means born from above, and John intends this word anonthen (greek) to have both meanings. He is plays on many words

2) we find "born of water" righter after "mothers womb" and before the verse that says being born of the spirit alone brings new birth.

3) Hence, if the new birth is only of the spirit, then baptism (water) does nothing, but Baptism of the Holy Spirit is what brings the new birth.

FYI: I've read The Large Catechism (90%) and The Small Catechism .

I agree with three on the grounds that the baptismal water does nothing! It is not the Water, as I pointed out before, it is God's action. This sacrament is not the outward sign that you think it is. It is not the outward act, it is the action of God, and it is that action that we must have faith in. This is were we are diverging, for you think of it as water and proclaiming entry into belief, we proclaim it as God choosing you and water is merely a symbol.

The water is of nothing, and the belief is of nothing (I exagerate for point). We depend not on these things in the Sacrament. It is God's action that is the stress.

I am not sure I agree with your intimations on 'afterbirth'. It doesn't seem to hold water to me. I am going to look at this further later.

Jesus needs no grace, because he lived without sin (Hebrews). True the Spirit came upon him, after he was baptized, but the Spirit came on the Apostles at Pentecost, and we find there no assocation with water baptism, but only the Spirit being poured out--like when God poured out rain on the earth in the time of Noah.

Jesus didn't get grace in John's Baptism, for John's baptism was for the remission of sin. It was penitential. Christ's Baptism is the one that gives grace. I merely mentioned the graceful acts that did so happen in that baptism so that you might think higher of Christs baptism. We do know that the apostles were baptised though .

 

[Phoebe]

The Book of Hebrews is quite interesting.

 

[theseed]

We depend not on these things in the Sacrament. It is God's action that is the stress.

I'm not convince that God acts in every sacrament. I've not been persuaded that the NT has such a teaching.

 

[JVAC]

I'm not convince that God acts in every sacrament. I've not been persuaded that the NT has such a teaching.

Well that is thread in of itself. I would love to sit down with you on that one, but I am lacking in the time, however, I think there is a four day weekend coming up .

 

[theseed]

Seed, how was your trip?

My trip was good, thanks for asking.

 

[theseed]

Well that is thread in of itself. I would love to sit down with you on that one, but I am lacking in the time, however, I think there is a four day weekend coming up .

I agree. I thought about saying the same thing. This thread is on infant baptism, read my most bottom post

 

[JVAC]

most bottom? isn't that the one that the one that says:

I agree. I thought about saying the same thing. This thread is on infant baptism, read my most bottom post