• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Baptism - Sprinkled or Dunked?

Walter

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The Vatican has a few rugs too, you know!
I wasn't the one that brought up the subject. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy.
The statement was made that it didn't matter whatsoever what goes on in Baptist churches because of their church polity. I showed documentation that the SBC Convention settled cases taking places in SBC churches.

And, while the following article in Christianity Today explains how the autonomy of IFB churches insulates them from being accountable as an organization, it shows how the scandals have rocked this tiny faction from many of the largest IFB churches to the Hyles and Bob Jones messes.
 
Last edited:

Charlie24

Active Member
I wasn't the one that brought up the subject. I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy.
The statement was made that it didn't matter whatsoever what goes on in Baptist churches because of their church polity. I showed documentation that the SBC Convention settled cases taking places in SBC churches.

It's probably gong to get much worse, Walter, as the road for the anti-Christ is being paved before our very eyes.
 

Charlie24

Active Member
We do agree on that

We agree on other things, but we're to busy arguing on the things where we disagree!

I can get along just fine with any Catholic whose faith is in our Lord Jesus Christ for their salvation.

That makes them my Brother in Christ regardless of our differences.

Faith in doctrine has never saved a single soul, but faith in the finished work of Christ will save the soul.
 

Cathode

Well-Known Member
The apostles were the foundation of the Church, they built the Church and set it in order.

The Scripture does not teach they passed down their apostleship.

Titus and Timothy are perfect Scriptural examples of those given Apostolic Authority, you are ignorant of Scripture on this mate.

“Speak these things as you teach and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you.” Titus 2:15

This is why Catholics follow the Authority lineage of those from the Apostles, not the self appointed men of Protestantism.

Titus and Timothy are clear Apostolic successors to teach and preach after them.
You are in denial of scripture. It’s staring you in the face in Scripture.
 

Walter

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
We agree on other things, but we're to busy arguing on the things where we disagree!

I can get along just fine with any Catholic whose faith is in our Lord Jesus Christ for their salvation.

That makes them my Brother in Christ regardless of our differences.

Faith in doctrine has never saved a single soul, but faith in the finished work of Christ will save the soul.

On Christ the solid rock I stand . . .
 

Charlie24

Active Member
Titus and Timothy are perfect Scriptural examples of those given Apostolic Authority, you are ignorant of Scripture on this mate.

“Speak these things as you teach and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you.” Titus 2:15

This is why Catholics follow the Authority lineage of those from the Apostles, not the self appointed men of Protestantism.

Titus and Timothy are clear Apostolic successors to teach and preach after them.
You are in denial of scripture. It’s staring you in the face in Scripture.

You know we're not going to agree on this.

Titus and Timothy were not chosen by God as apostles. They are delegates of the apostles, namely Paul.

The rest of the disciples who are referred in Scripture as apostles fall in the same category, only the 13.

They were not picked out formally by God, and there is no succession to the apostleship in Scripture.

Mathias was chosen to replace Judas Iscariot, that's because of the 12 stones of the foundation of New Jerusalem bearing there names.
 

Charlie24

Active Member
You know we're not going to agree on this.

Titus and Timothy were not chosen by God as apostles. They are delegates of the apostles, namely Paul.

The rest of the disciples who are referred in Scripture as apostles fall in the same category, only the 13.

They were not picked out formally by God, and there is no succession to the apostleship in Scripture.

Mathias was chosen to replace Judas Iscariot, that's because of the 12 stones of the foundation of New Jerusalem bearing there names.

Paul was the greatest of the apostles, I don't know what honor will be bestowed on him, but you can bet it's glorious.
 

Charlie24

Active Member
Paul was the greatest of the apostles, I don't know what honor will be bestowed on him, but you can bet it's glorious.

James was supposedly the first apostle to die, by the sword.

There was no successor named for him in Scripture.

That would have been the perfect opportunity to have proven apostle succession.

But it's not there!
 

Cathode

Well-Known Member
You know we're not going to agree on this.

Titus and Timothy were not chosen by God as apostles. They are delegates of the apostles, namely Paul.

No. Not just delegates. They are granted Authority. You can see this in scripture staring at you.

“you teach and rebuke with all authority

The Apostles only sent out approved men, this is a lineage of approved men.

This is why Paul warns Timothy not to appoint men hastily otherwise he would share in the wrongs of a poorly selected man.

“Do not be too quick in the laying on of hands and thereby share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure.”

We see a clear lineage of Authority established by the Apostles in Scripture.

These are the Apostolic successors. Paul, Timothy and whoever Timothy appointed and so on.

People outside this succession from the Apostles do not have Authority to teach the public revelation of the Apostles.
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
If only Baptist would admit they have a horrible peado problem they want to sweep under the rug.

The Southern Baptist Convention, America’s largest Protestant denomination, confronted its own sex-abuse crisis in the form of an investigation by the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News. The newspapers reported that hundreds of Southern Baptist clergy and staff had been accused of sexual misconduct over the past 20 years, including dozens who returned to church duties, while leaving more than 700 victims with little in the way of justice or apologies.

The IFB is a tiny, tiny fraction of Christianity in America but they're dealing with widespread occurrence of clergy and church leaders diddling children. One so big Hulu has done a series exposing the sickness within.
Again, if the best argument you have to defend centuries of Papal corruption, child s:x abuse and mutilation, paedo priests being systematically transferred allowing new victims, is to point to baptists and say they have problems too, then all you have is deflection and RCC propaganda that avoids the truth and accountability.

I realize the thread has been hijacked, which was not my intention, so I’ll bow out with apologies to the OP.

Peace to you
 

Charlie24

Active Member
No. Not just delegates. They are granted Authority. You can see this in scripture staring at you.

“you teach and rebuke with all authority

The Apostles only sent out approved men, this is a lineage of approved men.

This is why Paul warns Timothy not to appoint men hastily otherwise he would share in the wrongs of a poorly selected man.

“Do not be too quick in the laying on of hands and thereby share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure.”

We see a clear lineage of Authority established by the Apostles in Scripture.

These are the Apostolic successors. Paul, Timothy and whoever Timothy appointed and so on.

People outside this succession from the Apostles do not have Authority to teach the public revelation of the Apostles.

So I guess since you are not qualified to read and understand the Scripture, you get all your marching orders from the Pope and the priests.

Sounds about right! I think I'll keep "studying to show myself approved unto God, a workman that need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
 

37818

Well-Known Member
Then, where is it stated in scripture “ Yea shall not baptise infants “?

It’s not there Charlie.

Infant baptism is implied like the Trinity however.

  • “She was baptized, with her household” (Acts 16:15)
  • “He was baptized at once, with all his family” (Acts 16:33; 18:8 also implicitly implies it)
  • “I did baptize also the household of Stephanas.” (1 Corinthians 1:16)

Nowhere is it taught in scripture that baptism is denied to infants.

Christianity has always baptised infants, it’s only when some men in Protestantism in the 1600s first decided they knew better than all Christianity preached another gospel and wrongful doctrine.
It’s unscriptural.

Scripture nowhere teaches denying infants baptism.
That infant's where in the first century baptized to be in the church is pure conjecture.
 

Cathode

Well-Known Member
So I guess since you are not qualified to read and understand the Scripture, you get all your marching orders from the Pope and the priests.

No, I can read the scriptures all I want, but what has never been allowed is to interpret scriptures how I want.
The interpretation of Scripture is singular for 2000 years, handed down from the Apostles, not me interpreting my own new conflicting doctrines from scripture like Protestants do.

Take these Leaders of their Churches 1800+ years ago. Their understanding of Scripture on Baptism is my understanding of Scripture after so much time.

“Moreover, the things proceeding from the waters were blessed by God, that this also might be a sign of men’s being destined to receive repentance and remission of sins, through the water and laver of regeneration,–as many as come to the truth, and are born again, and receive blessing from God.” Theopilus of Antioch, To Autolycus, 2:16 (A.D. 181).

” ‘And dipped himself,’ says [the Scripture], ‘seven times in Jordan.’ It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but it served as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.'” Irenaeus, Fragment, 34 (A.D. 190).

Is your understanding of Baptism the same as Luther’s understanding of Baptism only after 500 years. No. Luther was the founder of “ Bible alone “ yet your interpretations are conflicted with his.
This is because people in Protestantism decided to interpret differing and conflicting doctrines from scripture, human traditions of men.

The most convincing thing about Baptismal Regeneration, is that all the Ancient Churches believed and taught it unanimously and have exactly the same interpretation of Scripture.

They constantly quote Jesus words in Scripture to mean Baptism.

“Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”

Now, you don’t understand Jesus words in scripture to mean Baptism, because you are following new human interpretations and traditions from Zwingli.

You would have been seen as a heretic at anytime in the first 1500 years of Christianity, they all unanimously believed in Baptismal Regeneration and cited Jesus words in scripture as proof.

I can give you many more quotes of these Church leaders citing Jesus words for Baptismal Regeneration. It was the universal interpretation of scripture till Zwingli in the 1500s, the Whole Church East and West.

“The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sins, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit.” Origen, Commentary on Romans, 5:9 (A.D. 244).

“[W]hen they come to us and to the Church which is one, ought to be baptized, for the reason that it is a small matter to ‘lay hands on them that they may receive the Holy Ghost,’ unless they receive also the baptism of the Church. For then finally can they be fully sanctified, and be the sons of God, if they be born of each sacrament; since it is written, ‘Except a man be born again of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.’…[O]nly baptism of the holy Church, by divine regeneration, for the kingdom of God, may be born of both sacraments, because it is written, ‘Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'” Cyprian, To Stephen, 71:72 (A.D. 253).

“And in the Gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with His divine voice, saying, “Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” This is the Spirit which from the beginning was borne over the waters; for neither can the Spirit operate without the water, nor the water without the Spirit…Unless therefore they receive saving baptism in the Catholic Church, which is one, they cannot be saved, but will be condemned with the carnal in the judgment of the Lord Christ.” Council of Carthage VII (A.D. 258).

“‘But you will perhaps say, What does the, baptism of water contribute towards the worship of God? In the first place, because that which hath pleased God is fulfilled. In the second place, because, when yon are regenerated and born again of water and of God, the frailty of your former birth, which you have through men, is cut off, and so at length you shall be able to attain salvation; hut otherwise it is impossible. For thus hath the true prophet testified to its with an oath: ‘Verily I say to you, That unless a man is born again of water...., he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Therefore make haste; for there is in these waters a certain power of mercy which was borne upon them at the beginning, and acknowledges those who are baptized under the name of the threefold sacrament, and rescues them from future punishments, presenting as a gift to God the souls that are consecrated by baptism. Betake yourselves therefore to these waters, for they alone can quench the violence of the future fire; and he who delays to approach to them, it is evident that the idol of unbelief remains in him, and by it be is prevented from hastening to the waters which confer salvation. For whether you be righteous or unrighteous, baptism is necessary for you in every respect: for the righteous, that perfection may be accomplished in him, and he may be born again to God; for the unrighteous, that pardon may he vouchsafed him of the sins which he has committed in ignorance. Therefore all should hasten to be born again to God without delay, because the end of every one’s life is uncertain.” Lactantius, Divine Institutes, 5:19 (A.D. 310).

Another scripture reference relating Circumcision to Baptism.

“We are circumcised not with a fleshly circumcision but with the circumcision of Christ, that is, we are born again into a new man; for, being buried with Him in His baptism, we must die to the old man, because the regeneration of baptism has the force of resurrection.” Hilary of Poitiers, Trinity, 9:9 (A.D. 359).

Again Scripture reference Water and Spirit Baptism.

“This then is what it is to be born again of water and of the Spirit, the being made dead being effected in the water, while our life is wrought in us through the Spirit. In three immersions, then, and with three invocations, the great mystery of baptism is performed, to the end that the type of death may be fully figured, and that by the tradition of the divine knowledge the baptized may have their souls enlightened. It follows that if there is any grace in the water, it is not of the nature of the water, but of the presence of the Spirit.” Basil, On the Spirit, 15:35 (A.D. 375).
 

Cathode

Well-Known Member
That infant's where in the first century baptized to be in the church is pure conjecture.

The real conjecture is that infants weren’t baptised.

Origen the Early Christian scholar writes.

“The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sins, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit.” Origen, Commentary on Romans, 5:9 (A.D. 244).

Not only does Origen credit infant baptism as Apostolic Tradition of the Church, he indicates that Baptism is Regenerational.
So in his time, he traces the practice of infant baptism back to the Apostles.

Besides, infant baptism was always practiced universally by all the Churches and universally believed as regeneration.

You know what is completely absent in the first 1500 years of Christianity, “ Believers baptism “, no one excluded infants from baptism for the first 1500.
 

Charlie24

Active Member
No, I can read the scriptures all I want, but what has never been allowed is to interpret scriptures how I want.
The interpretation of Scripture is singular for 2000 years, handed down from the Apostles, not me interpreting my own new conflicting doctrines from scripture like Protestants do.

Take these Leaders of their Churches 1800+ years ago. Their understanding of Scripture on Baptism is my understanding of Scripture after so much time.

“Moreover, the things proceeding from the waters were blessed by God, that this also might be a sign of men’s being destined to receive repentance and remission of sins, through the water and laver of regeneration,–as many as come to the truth, and are born again, and receive blessing from God.” Theopilus of Antioch, To Autolycus, 2:16 (A.D. 181).

” ‘And dipped himself,’ says [the Scripture], ‘seven times in Jordan.’ It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but it served as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.'” Irenaeus, Fragment, 34 (A.D. 190).

Is your understanding of Baptism the same as Luther’s understanding of Baptism only after 500 years. No. Luther was the founder of “ Bible alone “ yet your interpretations are conflicted with his.
This is because people in Protestantism decided to interpret differing and conflicting doctrines from scripture, human traditions of men.

The most convincing thing about Baptismal Regeneration, is that all the Ancient Churches believed and taught it unanimously and have exactly the same interpretation of Scripture.

They constantly quote Jesus words in Scripture to mean Baptism.

“Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”

Now, you don’t understand Jesus words in scripture to mean Baptism, because you are following new human interpretations and traditions from Zwingli.

You would have been seen as a heretic at anytime in the first 1500 years of Christianity, they all unanimously believed in Baptismal Regeneration and cited Jesus words in scripture as proof.

I can give you many more quotes of these Church leaders citing Jesus words for Baptismal Regeneration. It was the universal interpretation of scripture till Zwingli in the 1500s, the Whole Church East and West.

“The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sins, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit.” Origen, Commentary on Romans, 5:9 (A.D. 244).

“[W]hen they come to us and to the Church which is one, ought to be baptized, for the reason that it is a small matter to ‘lay hands on them that they may receive the Holy Ghost,’ unless they receive also the baptism of the Church. For then finally can they be fully sanctified, and be the sons of God, if they be born of each sacrament; since it is written, ‘Except a man be born again of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.’…[O]nly baptism of the holy Church, by divine regeneration, for the kingdom of God, may be born of both sacraments, because it is written, ‘Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'” Cyprian, To Stephen, 71:72 (A.D. 253).

“And in the Gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with His divine voice, saying, “Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” This is the Spirit which from the beginning was borne over the waters; for neither can the Spirit operate without the water, nor the water without the Spirit…Unless therefore they receive saving baptism in the Catholic Church, which is one, they cannot be saved, but will be condemned with the carnal in the judgment of the Lord Christ.” Council of Carthage VII (A.D. 258).

“‘But you will perhaps say, What does the, baptism of water contribute towards the worship of God? In the first place, because that which hath pleased God is fulfilled. In the second place, because, when yon are regenerated and born again of water and of God, the frailty of your former birth, which you have through men, is cut off, and so at length you shall be able to attain salvation; hut otherwise it is impossible. For thus hath the true prophet testified to its with an oath: ‘Verily I say to you, That unless a man is born again of water...., he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Therefore make haste; for there is in these waters a certain power of mercy which was borne upon them at the beginning, and acknowledges those who are baptized under the name of the threefold sacrament, and rescues them from future punishments, presenting as a gift to God the souls that are consecrated by baptism. Betake yourselves therefore to these waters, for they alone can quench the violence of the future fire; and he who delays to approach to them, it is evident that the idol of unbelief remains in him, and by it be is prevented from hastening to the waters which confer salvation. For whether you be righteous or unrighteous, baptism is necessary for you in every respect: for the righteous, that perfection may be accomplished in him, and he may be born again to God; for the unrighteous, that pardon may he vouchsafed him of the sins which he has committed in ignorance. Therefore all should hasten to be born again to God without delay, because the end of every one’s life is uncertain.” Lactantius, Divine Institutes, 5:19 (A.D. 310).

Another scripture reference relating Circumcision to Baptism.

“We are circumcised not with a fleshly circumcision but with the circumcision of Christ, that is, we are born again into a new man; for, being buried with Him in His baptism, we must die to the old man, because the regeneration of baptism has the force of resurrection.” Hilary of Poitiers, Trinity, 9:9 (A.D. 359).

Again Scripture reference Water and Spirit Baptism.

“This then is what it is to be born again of water and of the Spirit, the being made dead being effected in the water, while our life is wrought in us through the Spirit. In three immersions, then, and with three invocations, the great mystery of baptism is performed, to the end that the type of death may be fully figured, and that by the tradition of the divine knowledge the baptized may have their souls enlightened. It follows that if there is any grace in the water, it is not of the nature of the water, but of the presence of the Spirit.” Basil, On the Spirit, 15:35 (A.D. 375).

Ok, Cathode, I hope you're paying attention. It is not the Pope or the priests, or my pastor, or any scholar, that reveals the Word God.

It is the Spirit of God that reveals the Word of God to us. Notice Paul says, "But God has revealed them to US by His Spirit."

1 Cor. 2:10-11

"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."

He, the Holy Spirit, is the only One qualified to reveal to us the Word of God.

And how do we receive it, Cathode?
 

Charlie24

Active Member
Ok, Cathode, I hope you're paying attention. It is not the Pope or the priests, or my pastor, or any scholar, that reveals the Word God.

It is the Spirit of God that reveals the Word of God to us. Notice Paul says, "But God has revealed them to US by His Spirit."

1 Cor. 2:10-11

"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."

He, the Holy Spirit, is the only One qualified to reveal to us the Word of God.

And how do we receive it, Cathode?

You see, the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to us from the Scripture "by the spirit of man which is in him."

Spirit to spirit. God's Spirit to man's spirit.
 

Charlie24

Active Member
You see, the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to us from the Scripture "by the spirit of man which is in him."

Spirit to spirit. God's Spirit to man's spirit.

I don't know if you've ever studied the functions of the body, soul, and spirit of man from the Scripture.

The spirit of man is how God communicates with man, through his spirit, Spirit to spirit.
 

Charlie24

Active Member
I don't know if you've ever studied the functions of the body, soul, and spirit of man from the Scripture.

The spirit of man is how God communicates with man, through his spirit, Spirit to spirit.

If you're doing it the way God intended for man to learn, the Holy Spirit is your private Interpreter.

Granted, man must begin on the milk of the Word from other men, but then you graduate to the meat of the Word.

And if you're studying the Scripture with a zeal to learn, letting Him guide your life, he will reveal to you the truth.

But at times we get in the way of that Process, as JonC pointed out, we begin leaning to our own understanding.
 

Charlie24

Active Member
If you're doing it the way God intended for man to learn, the Holy Spirit is your private Interpreter.

Granted, man must begin on the milk of the Word from other men, but then you graduate to the meat of the Word.

And if you're studying the Scripture with a zeal to learn, letting Him guide your life, he will reveal to you the truth.

But at times we get in the way of that Process, as JonC pointed out, we begin leaning to our own understanding.

This is the very reason God gave this to us from Solomon,

Prov. 3:5-6

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths."

The entire thing with God is this one fact, do you trust the Lord to the point of risking everything on His promises?
 
Top