The Baptist Church and it's policy on baptism

  • Thread starter Thread starter MontChevalier
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
david_ruiz said:
jlhargus;8188910:
JL:

The thief had no opportunity to be baptized. Natural birth is a necessity, but not an absolute necessity, without exceptions. Even natural birth has exceptions. In exceptional cases the physician intervenes birthing by cesarean. In exceptional cases the Great Physician must intervene in our spiritual birth. The Holy Spirit can circumcise the heart of one who desires to do the will of God, by baptism of desire or blood. When the lack, of baptism by water, is thru no deliberate fault of their own, such as the thief on the cross. CONTINUED;
Yes I have heard this before ,that if the thief had a chance ,he would have been baptized.Yes i have heard the intent must be there in case you don’t get baptized before a sudden death. It still is trying to maintain grace with a work -can you have both ways -saved by grace ,yet conditional upon a rite, a work ? But you are right ,given a chance the thief would have been baptized out of love for his savior who gave His life for him,obedience /confession driven by a regenerated heart .Remember, you must be born again to even “see” the kingdom, before you can begin to be sanctified, or even enter thru the pearly gates. My opinion is he saw (was born again) believed already ,This is the case most of the time in NT
Click to expand...
You appear to be gathering the notion of work from the book of Romans and it is not works or work but rather works of law.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
david_ruiz said:
not much time ,if being born again (regeneration) is NOT old testament , why did Jesus bring it up as if Nicodemus was supposed to know ? That would take some time to show OT scriptures …As far as Acts 2 ,you must also look at the several other instances in Acts where people “believe” and even get the gift of the Holy Spirit BEFORE baptism. Acts 2 lumps it all together while Peter speaks .But if you follow events ,they definitely gladly believed before baptism. Man, throw our formulas out the window. Jesus did not need rituals to make people “see” and know Him and He doesn’t today either.
Click to expand...
Probably because Nicodemus knew the Old Testament and if as Paul was doing using the Old Testament to explain the New, it is as if to say you don’t understand what you know as is the case for many that read the Old Testament.
 
drywall said:
In a nut shell ; Baptist believe that a child before the age of reason, or before thay are able to understand are in God’s special care. If they should happen to die they will go to heaven. When a child is old enough to understand, and that is not the same for every child, then it is the same as a adult, faith comes by hearing the Word of God as the Bible teaches.
The Holy Spirit applies that teaching to a persons heart giving that person a efficual call to salvation thereby being born again.
An efficual call is a call by God to salvation that a person can not or will notrefuse

drywall
Click to expand...
Belgic Calvinist confessionAnd indeed Christ shed his blood no less for the washing of the children of the faithful, than for adult persons; and therefore they ought to receive the sign and sacrament of that, which Christ hath done for them; as the Lord commanded in the law, that they should be made partakers of the sacrament of Christ’s suffering and death, shortly after they were born, by offering for them a lamb, which was a sacrament of Jesus Christ. Moreover, what circumcision was to the Jews, that baptism is for our children. And for this reason Paul calls baptism the circumcision of Christ.

John Calvin: “Baptism also applies to infants, who possess faith in common with adults … in baptising infants we are obeying the Lord’s will” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1536 edition, 4.23).

Westminster Confession of Faith Scriptural support for infant baptism. Genesis 17:7, Galatians 3:9, Acts 2:38-39, Romans 4:11-12, 1 Corinthians 7:14, Acts 16:30-31
 
david_ruiz said:
Sorry you are right -grabbed my quote from another topic but dealt with being born of water and of the spirit.I was of the opinion that born of water is obvious to mean amniotic , for Nicodemus brought it up first . Jesus says yes you must first be born ,then be born of the spirit .They are separate events.
Click to expand...
Yes, being physically born and then born of the Spirit are separate events. I do not believe that the water is meaning to be amniotic, because if we look at certain events in the Scriptures, those who were baptized instantly link water towards it. For example, Philip and the Eunuch, in Acts 8:36. They were travelling, and the Eunuch sees water and says to Philip, “What doth hinder me from being baptized?” and there and then the Eunuch was baptized. Water is linked to baptism, as is the Spirit.
david_ruiz said:
Hence what is born of the flesh is flesh . What is born of the spirit is spirit. I could see why some think it water baptism ,especially if they think it is effectual (that you need it for regeneration). He does say if you believe and are baptized you shall be saved ,but He also says if you believe and confess you shall be saved, an finally, if you call out to him you shall be saved …*Regardless, baptism was not regenerational according to Catholic view until after Pentecost . *
Click to expand...
Where is this teaching found? I’ve never heard of that. Please, show me in Church documents where we believe that baptismal regeneration did not occur until after Pentecost.
david_ruiz said:
Why wouldn’t He tell Nicodemus what he could do NOW to be "born -again ? Born -again is old and new testament.(I believe “regeneration” was more used in old testament)-and the Holy Spirit operated differently .Nevertheless .old testament saints had a regenerated spirit and were "illuminated’. All Jews were circumcised , barmitzvahed(confirmation) ,yet not all were born again -Nicodemus shows this to be true(not being born again despite being quite religious). Again water baptism was a command several years away.
Click to expand...
In regards to your first point, I’m not sure what you’re saying. Jesus did tell Nicodemus what he must do to be born again, and then showed this when Jesus, later in the passage, has his Apostles start baptising. Notice how in Matthew, one of the last commands of the Lord is that they go out and baptise. Why is baptism so important that Jesus would mention it before he ascended? It is interesting. Yes, you are correct, while all Jews were circumcised, etc, not all worshipped God. They didn’t live their faith. Which isn’t surprising, the Old Law did not give grace to people so they could follow it, whereas the New Law does, from the Holy Spirit.
 
Cruxis117 said:
Yes, being physically born and then born of the Spirit are separate events. I do not believe that the water is meaning to be amniotic, because if we look at certain events in the Scriptures, those who were baptized instantly link water towards it. For example, Philip and the Eunuch, in Acts 8:36. They were travelling, and the Eunuch sees water and says to Philip, “What doth hinder me from being baptized?” and there and then the Eunuch was baptized. Water is linked to baptism, as is the Spirit.

Where is this teaching found? I’ve never heard of that. Please, show me in Church documents where we believe that baptismal regeneration did not occur until after Pentecost.

In regards to your first point, I’m not sure what you’re saying. Jesus did tell Nicodemus what he must do to be born again, and then showed this when Jesus, later in the passage, has his Apostles start baptising. Notice how in Matthew, one of the last commands of the Lord is that they go out and baptise. Why is baptism so important that Jesus would mention it before he ascended? It is interesting. Yes, you are correct, while all Jews were circumcised, etc, not all worshipped God. They didn’t live their faith. Which isn’t surprising, the Old Law did not give grace to people so they could follow it, whereas the New Law does, from the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
It is not like Jews did not understand water baptism. They did not understand baptismal regeneration by Water/Spirit.

The Dead Sea Scrolls also depict the baptism ritual as something practised by much of Jewry at that time. To this day Jews practice baptism for both male and female converts who immerse themselves in a ritual bath (Jewish Literacy by Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, 1991, page 625).
 
CopticChristian said:
Better yet provide one verse that anyone says to accept Christ as your personal Lord and Savior. Provide Biblical evidence for the nonbiblical teaching of Sanctification that Calvinists tout.
Click to expand...
Better yet look it up! But you won’t find it because it’s not there! 😉 I rest my case…

Matthew
 
david_ruiz said:
Sorry you are right -grabbed my quote from another topic but dealt with being born of water and of the spirit.I was of the opinion that born of water is obvious to mean amniotic , for Nicodemus brought it up first . Jesus says yes you must first be born ,then be born of the spirit .They are separate events .Hence what is born of the flesh is flesh . What is born of the spirit is spirit. I could see why some think it water baptism ,especially if they think it is effectual (that you need it for regeneration). He does say if you believe and are baptized you shall be saved ,but He also says if you believe and confess you shall be saved, an finally, if you call out to him you shall be saved …Regardless, baptism was not regenerational according to Catholic view until after Pentecost . Why wouldn’t He tell Nicodemus what he could do NOW to be "born -again ? Born -again is old and new testament.(I believe “regeneration” was more used in old testament)-and the Holy Spirit operated differently .Nevertheless .old testament saints had a regenerated spirit and were "illuminated’. All Jews were circumcised , barmitzvahed(confirmation) ,yet not all were born again -Nicodemus shows this to be true(not being born again despite being quite religious). Again water baptism was a command several years away.
Click to expand...
As you said in a prior post your view is in the minority
 
CopticChristian said:
david ruiz;8198004:
jlhargus;8188910:
JL:

The thief had no opportunity to be baptized. Natural birth is a necessity, but not an absolute necessity, without exceptions. Even natural birth has exceptions. In exceptional cases the physician intervenes birthing by cesarean. In exceptional cases the Great Physician must intervene in our spiritual birth. The Holy Spirit can circumcise the heart of one who desires to do the will of God, by baptism of desire or blood. When the lack, of baptism by water, is thru no deliberate fault of their own, such as the thief on the cross. CONTINUED;

You appear to be gathering the notion of work from the book of Romans and it is not works or work but rather works of law.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yes ,there is works of the law and then there are works of righteousness. Many were gentiles -no hebrew law ,yet they had their works of the flesh.Even we can begin in the spirit and end up in flesh ,trying to be good-(religious).Anyways the new law is faith and grace ,a free gift .Now if you do things for it , it ain’t grace or free.Works can sanctify us but not justify us. At any rate, faith comes first.
Click to expand...
 
CopticChristian said:
Probably because Nicodemus knew the Old Testament and if as Paul was doing using the Old Testament to explain the New, it is as if to say you don’t understand what you know as is the case for many that read the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
Sorry ,don’t understand your statement.
 
david_ruiz said:
CopticChristian;8198036:
david ruiz;8198004:
Yes ,there is works of the law and then there are works of righteousness. Many were gentiles -no hebrew law ,yet they had their works of the flesh.Even we can begin in the spirit and end up in flesh ,trying to be good-(religious).Anyways the new law is faith and grace ,a free gift .Now if you do things for it , it ain’t grace or free.Works can sanctify us but not justify us. At any rate, faith comes first.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
That is not what James says. Salvation/Justification is the work of God start to finish. By grace you have been saved, by Faith a gift. The saving grace by Faith allows you to do what is pleasing to God, it is not Plan A if you do the Law (Romans2 Moral Law), no one does the Law so because of Christ doing it we get his Righteousness, Plan B, it is we can only do the law by grace through saving Faith so that our works, following the Moral law, what you call good deeds are by grace and we are rewarded because our God is Father unlike an alternate view as Judge acquitting a guilty criminal legally.

We are legally declared righteous and become righteous because of Christ. Sanctification is not a biblical doctrine. Justification is a process. Not interested in hearing about what you believe about sanctification.
Click to expand...
 
jlhargus said:
JL:
Repent means to trun from sin,it doesn’t mean BELIEVE. If you don’t believe what’s the point of repenting? What is there to repent from if you don’t believe?
Click to expand...
FOR REMISSION OF SINS. AND you shall RECEIVE the gift of the Holy Spirit. Did you leave that out and jumb to vs41, because in baptism our sins are remitted and washed away and we receive the Holy Spirit. That would contradict your tradition we receive the Holy Spirit when we first believe.

You post, How can one receive the gospel words unless a spiritual child? Answer; Thur the gift of faith that comes for the adult by hearing the Word and being open to truth so the Holy Spirit can prick the heart. The Holy Spirit pricks the heart with that seed of faith.
Click to expand...
 
jlhargus said:
JL:

I notice you didn’t finish quoting Peter. After he said BE BAPTIZED in the name of the Lord Jesus. He continued to say
Click to expand...
FOR REMISSION OF SINS. AND you shall RECEIVE the gift of the Holy Spirit. Did you leave that out and jumb to vs41, I do not play games ,as you unkindly insinuate .I do not dodge His words ,you do .He said :# 1- REPENT(believe -my interpretation), # 2-be Baptized for remission of sins, and (with #1 and #2 ) you,ll receive Holy Ghost .It goes on to say they gladly received his words-the gospel THEN were baptized .Baptized for what ? remission of sins ,maybe .They certainly were not baptized in order to believe , for they already believed. .You don’t gladly receive unless you believe. If this were all our scriptures ,I would agree with their apparent order.Only trouble is , further in Acts the order is reversed.The spirit fell before baptism .I put them all together and say you are baptized because you already believe and already are born again.It still fits Acts 2 . Acts two does not say they recieved the gift of the holy Spirit after water baptism .It does not say they spoke in tongues after baptism etc .It may be insinuated from peters words , but I think that would be a faulty assumption.
You post, How can one receive the gospel words unless a spiritual child? Answer; Thur the gift of faith that comes for the adult by hearing the Word and being open to truth so the Holy Spirit can prick the heart. The Holy Spirit pricks the heart with that seed of faith.
Click to expand...
…being open to the truth .Man is not open to the truth -“No man seeks after God”. Indeed the Word must come -some say that is “sprinkling”. Yes they are seeds ,but that is not new life…yet.Conviction(that you are lost) is not evidence of new birth.
 
david_ruiz said:
I do not play games ,as you unkindly insinuate .I do not dodge His words ,you do .He said :# 1- REPENT(believe -my interpretation), # 2-be Baptized for remission of sins, and (with #1 and #2 ) you,ll receive Holy Ghost .It goes on to say they gladly received his words-the gospel THEN were baptized .Baptized for what ? remission of sins ,maybe .They certainly were not baptized in order to believe , for they already believed. .You don’t gladly receive unless you believe. If this were all our scriptures ,I would agree with their apparent order.Only trouble is , further in Acts the order is reversed.The spirit fell before baptism .I put them all together and say you are baptized because you already believe and already are born again.It still fits Acts 2 . Acts two does not say they recieved the gift of the holy Spirit after water baptism .It does not say they spoke in tongues after baptism etc .It may be insinuated from peters words , but I think that would be a faulty assumption.
…being open to the truth .Man is not open to the truth -“No man seeks after God”. Indeed the Word must come -some say that is “sprinkling”. Yes they are seeds ,but that is not new life…yet.Conviction(that you are lost) is not evidence of new birth.
Click to expand...
This dialogue can be solved with Sacred Tradition or continue to quibble. Ladies and gentleman we have a split decision. No contest…
 
CopticChristian said:
This dialogue can be solved with Sacred Tradition or continue to quibble. Ladies and gentleman we have a split decision. No contest…
Click to expand...
A built up Tradiion of two rues .Rule #1 -we can not be wrong. Rule #2- if we err, rule #1 applies.
 
david_ruiz said:
CopticChristian;8198036:
david ruiz;8198004:
Yes ,there is works of the law and then there are works of righteousness. Many were gentiles -no hebrew law ,yet they had their works of the flesh.Even we can begin in the spirit and end up in flesh ,trying to be good-(religious).Anyways the new law is faith and grace ,a free gift .Now if you do things for it , it ain’t grace or free.Works can sanctify us but not justify us. At any rate, faith comes first.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Define for me and provide evidence for the “works of the flesh” in the Old Testament that correlates with what Paul is talking about in the book of Romans so that I may be able to understand and dialogue with you.
Click to expand...
 
david_ruiz said:
A built up Tradiion of two rues .Rule #1 -we can not be wrong. Rule #2- if we err, rule #1 applies.
Click to expand...
Provide some understanding as it regards your understanding of your rules. Even theorems have examples.
 
david_ruiz said:
I do not play games ,as you unkindly insinuate .I do not dodge His words ,you do .He said :# 1- REPENT(believe -my interpretation), # 2-be Baptized for remission of sins, and (with #1 and #2 ) you,ll receive Holy Ghost .It goes on to say they gladly received his words-the gospel THEN were baptized .Baptized for what ? remission of sins ,maybe .They certainly were not baptized in order to believe , for they already believed. .You don’t gladly receive unless you believe. If this were all our scriptures ,I would agree with their apparent order.Only trouble is , further in Acts the order is reversed.The spirit fell before baptism .I put them all together and say you are baptized because you already believe and already are born again.It still fits Acts 2 . Acts two does not say they recieved the gift of the holy Spirit after water baptism .It does not say they spoke in tongues after baptism etc .It may be insinuated from peters words , but I think that would be a faulty assumption.
…being open to the truth .Man is not open to the truth -“No man seeks after God”. Indeed the Word must come -some say that is “sprinkling”. Yes they are seeds ,but that is not new life…yet.Conviction(that you are lost) is not evidence of new birth.
Click to expand...
I am assuming, that possibly “no man seeks after God” is a quote from Romans 3. If this is so then in actuallity it is a quote from Psalm XIV that states if you continue to read…

3They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

4Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

5There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.

or were you just saying that is how you feel, because when I see “word” in quotes I believe that possibly someone is referencing something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top