M
Milliardo
Guest
Yes, but what did it mean for them to “come to Him”? They were brought to Him so He could touch them and bless them, not baptize them; which is what He did. Big difference between the two.In essence He did. When He said that “of such is the kingdom of God,” that means that they are already saved, therefore nothing more need to be done to save them.
Again, does that mean He disallows baptizing infants? That cannot be seen in the text, either implicilty or explicitly.
Again, nothing there that implies He forbids baptism of infants and children. Where can that be seen?
The scriptures make it unmistakably clear that baptism is unto repentance for the remission of sins:
This is often used as a last resort to show infant baptism is wrong; again, there is nothing there that indicates any objection to it. Since baptism would be repentance and remission of sins, then would baptism of the dead make any sense? See, it goes back to that, and ironically what you just stated goes against it. There is more likelihood for an infant to have repentance through his parents and a remission of sins, since he is alive, than for someone who is dead who cannot take advantage of those graces. For one, a dead person is already in God’s Judgment; how then can baptism be of any use to him since he is beyond repentance and remission of sins? See, now you will have to make baptism of the dead work by what you posted there.
As I’ve pointed out, and the dead can?Little children cannot fulfil any of these requirenents for baptism.