Four Ways the Bible Supports Infant Baptism (Apologetics video)

  • Thread starter Thread starter dmar198
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Very well spoken video! 👍

You could add a fifth evidence being John the Baptist. Consider Luke 1:15:
15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.
Click to expand...
 
MrSnaith said:
Very well spoken video! 👍

You could add a fifth evidence being John the Baptist. Consider Luke 1:15:
Click to expand...
I don’t see how you would apply that toward Infant Baptism. In fact, the adversary might turn it against you in proving the opposite.
 
MrSnaith said:
I’m not sure I follow. Could you clarify?
Click to expand...
The problem is that the opponent of infant baptism (Baptists, fundamentalists, and Evangelicals) will say that John the Baptist had no need for Baptism, since he was Sanctified by Jesus directly (as they deny Baptismal Regeneration.)

You might argue that he was sanctified as an infant of course, but they will show that it did not require any baptism.
 
AmbroseSJ said:
The problem is that the opponent of infant baptism (Baptists, fundamentalists, and Evangelicals) will say that John the Baptist had no need for Baptism, since he was Sanctified by Jesus directly (as they deny Baptismal Regeneration.)

You might argue that he was sanctified as an infant of course, but they will show that it did not require any baptism.
Click to expand...
Hmm. I see. You’re right of course. It’s too bad they don’t recognize that it’s a matter of semantics. “Baptism,” meaning immersion, is a symbol of death, harking back to the Flood, is an immersion into the death of Christ so as to be reborn in Him. The formula used in Baptism to validate it is just the ordinary form(ula). We are all baptized by Jesus, of course, but through intermediaries: His faithful. This is likewise the case of John, who received his baptism at the sound of Mary’s greeting.

But I’m preaching to the choir here.
 
MrSnaith said:
Hmm. I see. You’re right of course. It’s too bad they don’t recognize that it’s a matter of semantics. “Baptism,” meaning immersion, is a symbol of death, harking back to the Flood, is an immersion into the death of Christ so as to be reborn in Him. The formula used in Baptism to validate it is just the ordinary form(ula). We are all baptized by Jesus, of course, but through intermediaries: His faithful. This is likewise the case of John, who received his baptism at the sound of Mary’s greeting.

But I’m preaching to the choir here.
Click to expand...
Yes.

Opponents of infant Baptism are also opponents of Baptismal Regeneration. So the mainline Protestant Churches all support Infant Baptism.

That is why dmar198’s video is so good. It proves the necessity of Baptismal Regeneration extends even to infants in Scripture. 👍

Therefore proving the necessity of Baptismal Regeneration removes the obstacle to infant Baptism. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top