Baptism - Sprinkled or Dunked?

[Charlie24]

Right, so the gates of Hell totally and universally prevailed against the Church after the Apostles and the entirety Christianity was deceived for 1500 years until Zwingli declared baptism was only symbolic.

Maybe the gates of Hell didn’t prevail against the Church for 1500 years as Jesus promised it wouldn’t and Zwingli was the one that apostatised.

I’d sooner believe in Bigfoot than your version of events.

Your saying the gates of Hell prevailed against Christianity entire for 1500 years, which makes Jesus words a lie.

So everyone was wrong and totally deceived in apostasy for the first 1500 years, and Jesus words are false?

Here is what is most likely by far. Zwingli was the one that apostatised, and those that follow his minority niche heresy today are deceived.

This is not the "gates of Hell" prevailing over the Church, Cathode.

It's one of many attempts by Satan to prevail over the Church.

You can see that God used the Reformers to put down this attempt.

 

[Charlie24]

This is not the "gates of Hell" prevailing over the Church, Cathode.

It's one of many attempts by Satan to prevail over the Church.

You can see that God used the Reformers to put down this attempt.

God planned for Martin Luther to be there at the so-called "Holy Stairs" at that precise time.

He wanted Luther in the act of the traditions of men when He would speak to his heart.

Thank God Martin Luther obeyed the Lord and received the truth, "the just shall live by faith."

 

[Charlie24]

God planned for Martin Luther to be there at the so-called "Holy Stairs" at that precise time.

He wanted Luther in the act of the traditions of men when He would speak to his heart.

Thank God Martin Luther obeyed the Lord and received the truth, "the just shall live by faith."

Many folks put down the Reformers for their mistakes in doctrine, and there are many mistakes.

I praise the Reformers for having the fortitude to be men and with their very lives on the line they obeyed the Lord and brought the Church out of apostasy.

I don't agree with some the things they believed, both Luther and Calvin, and the rest,

But they are great in the eyes of God, with their mistakes. They are to be honored by us for what they have done, regardless of their doctrines.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Right, so the gates of Hell totally and universally prevailed against the Church after the Apostles and the entirety Christianity was deceived for 1500 years until Zwingli declared baptism was only symbolic.

You do realize that there were those throughout the past 2000 years who did not think sprinkling babies with magic water saved them. right? Always been truly born again and truly baptized believers (albeit a small minority) who did not follow the "church" mandates. Always hated and vilified by "church" historians, but nonetheless still holding to biblical truth and not error of the organized religion.

 

[Cathode]

Infant baptism was never a first century Christian practice.

Where does it say that in Scripture? It’s not even implied that infants were excluded from baptism, let alone stated explicitly that they were excluded from baptism.

What is implied in scripture is that whole households and families were baptised, this would include infants.
Middle eastern households even today aren’t nuclear, and are loaded with infants, this was doublely so in Apostolic times.

Next we have the testimony of all the Early Christians themselves saying that it was universally a Christian Church practice continually done from the Apostles.

“[T]herefore children are also baptized.” Origen, Homily on Luke, XIV (A.D. 233).

“For this reason, moreover, the Church received from the apostles the tradition of baptizing infants too.” Origen, Homily on Romans, V:9 (A.D. 244).

“Baptism is given for the remission of sins; and according to the usage of the Church, Baptism is given even to infants. And indeed if there were nothing in infants which required a remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous.” Origen, Homily on Leviticus, 8:3 (post A.D. 244).

“And if any one seek for divine authority in this matter, though what is held by the whole Church, and that not as instituted by Councils, but as a matter of invariable custom, is rightly held to have been handed down by apostolical authority, still we can form a true conjecture of the value of the sacrament of baptism in the case of infants, from the parallel of circumcision, which was received by God’s earlier people, and before receiving which Abraham was justified, as Cornelius also was enriched with the gift of the Holy Spirit before he was baptized.” Augustine, On Baptism against the Donatist, 4:24:31 (A.D. 400).

The only controversy in Early Christianity regarding infant Baptism was when the child was to be baptised.
It was suggested by some that infants should be baptised on the eighth day as was customary with the Jewish practice of circumcision.
But the heads of the churches decided that it should be done immediately without delay in case of death, because Baptism was always seen as regenerational.

“The blessed Cyprian, indeed, said, in order to correct those who thought that an infant should not be baptized before the eighth day, that it was not the body but the soul which behoved to be saved from perdition — in which statement he was not inventing any new doctrine, but preserving the firmly established faith of the Church; and he, along with some of his colleagues in the episcopal office, held that a child may be properly baptized immediately after its birth.” Augustine, Epistle 166:8:23 (A.D. 412).

 

[Charlie24]

Where does it say that in Scripture? It’s not even implied that infants were excluded from baptism, let alone stated explicitly that they were excluded from baptism.

What is implied in scripture is that whole households and families were baptised, this would include infants.
Middle eastern households even today aren’t nuclear, and are loaded with infants, this was doublely so in Apostolic times.

Next we have the testimony of all the Early Christians themselves saying that it was universally a Christian Church practice continually done from the Apostles.

“[T]herefore children are also baptized.” Origen, Homily on Luke, XIV (A.D. 233).

“For this reason, moreover, the Church received from the apostles the tradition of baptizing infants too.” Origen, Homily on Romans, V:9 (A.D. 244).

“Baptism is given for the remission of sins; and according to the usage of the Church, Baptism is given even to infants. And indeed if there were nothing in infants which required a remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous.” Origen, Homily on Leviticus, 8:3 (post A.D. 244).

“And if any one seek for divine authority in this matter, though what is held by the whole Church, and that not as instituted by Councils, but as a matter of invariable custom, is rightly held to have been handed down by apostolical authority, still we can form a true conjecture of the value of the sacrament of baptism in the case of infants, from the parallel of circumcision, which was received by God’s earlier people, and before receiving which Abraham was justified, as Cornelius also was enriched with the gift of the Holy Spirit before he was baptized.” Augustine, On Baptism against the Donatist, 4:24:31 (A.D. 400).

The only controversy in Early Christianity regarding infant Baptism was when the child was to be baptised.
It was suggested by some that infants should baptised on the eighth day as was customary with the Jewish practice of circumcision.
But the heads of the churches decided that it should be done immediately without delay in case of death, because Baptism was always seen as regenerational.

“The blessed Cyprian, indeed, said, in order to correct those who thought that an infant should not be baptized before the eighth day, that it was not the body but the soul which behoved to be saved from perdition — in which statement he was not inventing any new doctrine, but preserving the firmly established faith of the Church; and he, along with some of his colleagues in the episcopal office, held that a child may be properly baptized immediately after its birth.” Augustine, Epistle 166:8:23 (A.D. 412).

No Cathode, absolutely not!

There are examples of adults being baptized in Scripture, all of them went down into the water and came up out or the water, in other words, full immersion.

There is not a single example of infant baptism, and you know it! It is one of the many traditions of men made up by works, having departed from faith.

 

[37818]

Where does it say that in Scripture?

Where does it say "infant baptism" in first century NT Holy Scripture?

 

[Cathode]

You do realize that there were those throughout the past 2000 years who did not think sprinkling babies with magic water saved them. right?

Sure. But if you were Christian, you believed in baptismal regeneration by water and The Holy Spirit and baptised your infants.
Outside of Christianity they did not believe or practice that.

Always been truly born again and truly baptized believers (albeit a small minority) who did not follow the "church" mandates. Always hated and vilified by "church" historians, but nonetheless still holding to biblical truth and not error of the organized religion.

Christianity has always been an organised religion, read Paul for 30 seconds and we can see a highly organised religion of rules and practices.

Those that didn’t follow the mandates were handed over to Satan, and were basically apostates, schismatics and heretics to be treated like Gentiles or tax collectors.

 

[rockytopva]

Church - I find the two most important figures....

1. The Senior Pastor
2. The Worship Leader

If the time in Worship and the Word are good... It makes for a great Sunday! Some people have it... Some people don't. “You’ll do better if you have passion for something in which you have aptitude. If Warren Buffett had gone into ballet, no one would have heard of him.” –Charlie Munger 2008 Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting.

There are people of all denominations who do not have the gift of being a senior pastor or worship leader. You never have heard of them because they have no aptitude or calling into their ministry. I would advise all to get to know the leaders before being baptized into any church.

 

[Cathode]

Where does it say "infant baptism" in first century NT Holy Scripture?

Where is it taught or stated explicitly that infants were to be denied baptism in Scripture?
Scripture doesn’t state that, that’s human teaching being added.
The best you could say is scripture is silent on the matter, which is no grounds at all for any doctrine to be built on it.

Scripture implies infant baptism when it states that whole households and families were baptised.

Then you have to explain why the entire Early Church baptised infants and said it was always Christian practice handed down from the Apostles.

 

[Cathode]

No Cathode, absolutely not!

There are examples of adults being baptized in Scripture, all of them went down into the water and came up out or the water, in other words, full immersion.

There is not a single example of infant baptism, and you know it! It is one of the many traditions of men made up by works, having departed from faith.

Scripture doesn’t teach denying infants baptism. This is human tradition of Zwingli founded in the 1520s.
Not Scriptural, not cultural and not historical in Christianity.

 

[Charlie24]

Scripture doesn’t teach denying infants baptism. This is human tradition of Zwingli founded in the 1520s.
Not Scriptural, not cultural and not historical in Christianity.

And Scripture doesn't condone what is plainly not seen in any form.

 

[Cathode]

See infant Baptism was as customary a practice among the Early Christians as Thanksgiving is among Americans.
It’s been a custom for hundreds of years, long documented and is also the living memory of the oldest living who remembered their oldest living at infancy saying their forefathers practiced it.

 

[Cathode]

And Scripture doesn't condone what is plainly not seen in any form.

Scripture does not condemn infant baptism and there is not one case in scripture where an infant was denied baptism.

Arguing from absence is not an argument.

To come up with the doctrine of denying infants baptism, you have to go beyond scripture to human tradition and doctrines of men.

Which it is.

 

[Cathode]

This is not the "gates of Hell" prevailing over the Church, Cathode.

It's one of many attempts by Satan to prevail over the Church.

You can see that God used the Reformers to put down this attempt.

You’ve been Zwingled mate, sorry to break it to you, but someone has to tell you.

It’s human tradition not the Scripture.

 

[Charlie24]

Scripture does not condemn infant baptism and there is not one case in scripture where an infant was denied baptism.

Arguing from absence is not an argument.

To come up with the doctrine of denying infants baptism, you have to go beyond scripture to human tradition and doctrines of men.

Which it is.

Have you read in Revelation the penalty for adding to the Word of God?

Look Cathode, I hope I haven't offended you, that was not my intentions.

But I have to be straight forward in dealing with the Word of God.

I reject the traditions of your Church, they are traditions based on works and not faith.

I follow in the paths to the great Reformers, "the Just shall live by faith."

The RCC is not following after the faith, I'm sorry.

 

[Cathode]

Have you read in Revelation the penalty for adding to the Word of God?

Look Cathode, I hope I haven't offended you, that was not my intentions.

But I have to be straight forward in dealing with the Word of God.

I reject the traditions of your Church, they are traditions based on works and not faith.

I follow in the paths to the great Reformers, "the Just shall live by faith."

The RCC is not following after the faith, I'm sorry.

You haven’t offended me mate, I enjoy the interaction.

I just reject the conflicting traditions of men in Bible alone Protestantism who are in conflict among themselves far more than they are with traditional Christianity.

The Fathers are just following the interpretation of Scripture that the Apostles taught, that’s why we follow them.

Bible alone Protestantism follows the interpretations of scripture that men taught, it’s traditions of men. There is a human founder for every Protestant tradition.

 

[37818]

Where is it taught or stated explicitly that infants were to be denied baptism in Scripture?

It doesn't have to be. Believer's baptism is what is taught. Besides baptism comes after the gospel.

Romans 1:16, ". . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . ."

 

[Charlie24]

The Catholic can point out that although the Bible says “justification is not by faith alone,” Baptists believe that justification is by faith alone. And although the Bible says baptism saves, Baptists believe that it does not save. And although the Bible says Communion is eating the body of Christ, Baptists believe that it is only a symbol. In other words, both sides have “clear proof texts” that say things the other denies. Thus, “where is that in the Bible” is often a non-starter.

Walter, I'm sorry to be so blunt, but you haven't a clue as to what James was saying in that statement.

Paul plainly said that salvation is by grace through faith, not of works. But the RCC disregards that as if it not there.

But they believe James when he said, see then how man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

The RCC is at a total loss of what James is actually saying, but that's not an excuse for you, Walter, God holds you personally responsible for finding the truth.

Paul is saying that initial salvation can only be by grace through faith without any works, period!

James is not referring to initial salvation, you can plainly see his letter is written to the saints, and concerning the believers.

James is saying to the believers, your works prove your justification, they work together in our salvation. he is not referring to the lost and their initial salvation as Paul was.

From James and his statement of works proving salvation comes the old, old saying by the saints before us, "we work because we are saved not get saved."

 

[Cathode]

It doesn't have to be. Believer's baptism is what is taught. Besides baptism comes after the gospel.

Romans 1:16, ". . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . ."

You haven’t established from scripture denying infants baptism.