What do Baptists and Catholics have in common?

[Thinkingstuff]

Since the only examples in the NT are people who say they believe who are baptized, that is what we go by. We don't assume anything in this matter; there is not a shred of clear evidence that infants were baptized or that people were forced to be baptized. The spread of the gospel did go to households where servants believed as well.

Knowing that culture is that a "safe" assumption? Is it safe to assume the Roman Cornellius servants wanted to be baptised and give up their personal gods? Or were they not baptised and thus the meaning of entire household has changed?

 

[Marcia]

Knowing that culture is that a "safe" assumption? Is it safe to assume the Roman Cornellius servants wanted to be baptised and give up their personal gods? Or were they not baptised and thus the meaning of entire household has changed?

No, it is not safe to assume this. Someone who really believes in Jesus would not force baptism on anyone because it would be pointless.

It is scriptural to assume that those who believed got baptized; those are the examples we have. Going beyond the text is always dangerous.

 

[Darron Steele]

What do Baptists and Catholics have in common?

Those who are practicing: a devotion to the same Jesus Christ.

 

[lori4dogs]

Those who are practicing: a devotion to the same Jesus Christ.

Thank you, bless your heart!

 

[Thinkingstuff]

No, it is not safe to assume this. Someone who really believes in Jesus would not force baptism on anyone because it would be pointless.

It is scriptural to assume that those who believed got baptized; those are the examples we have. Going beyond the text is always dangerous.

What I was asking what was safe was your statment that all who believed did so freely especially considering their times and practices.
As far as going beyond text. It happens all the time. In all denominations that I know of. For instance. Trinity is beyond text. Soul freedom is beyond the text. Faith alone is beyond text. Scriptures alone is beyond text. TULIP is beyond text. So there are a lot of essential ideas to our faith that are developed going beyond the text.

 

[DHK]

Knowing that culture is that a "safe" assumption? Is it safe to assume the Roman Cornellius servants wanted to be baptised and give up their personal gods? Or were they not baptised and thus the meaning of entire household has changed?

Is it safe to assume that each one in the household owned their own chariot?
That each one could speak ten different languages?
That each one had dual citizenship such as Paul did?

You cannot read into the Scriptures that which is not there.
You cannot assume anything except what the Scriptures tell you.
If the Scriptures do not tell you that infants were baptized, then infants were not baptized. Baptism always follows faith in Christ and repentance towards God, which is incapable of any infant.

 

[DHK]

Because this thread in now past 30 pages it needs to be closed.
Please feel free to start a new one if you so desire.