Not to bring up the Catholic thing again, but...

Receiving is not quite the same thing as decision making. Decision making requires a thought process. It leans on you. Receiving is a bit different. While it can look like a decision, it is not. As was stated before, I believed. Always did. Someone convinced me that I had to make a decision. It was very confusing to me. I dont remember actually making a decision. I always had believed that Christ died for my sins. I had received Christ, but I hadnt made a decision.

hard to explain, but it leads me to my next topic, which is infant baptism..

I can only say that while there isnt a specific infant being baptized in the bible, there are cases of entire households. Households wouldnt be like my household back then. It would have included many people, and there were most likely infants in those houses. If there were not (of course the bible doesnt say), then it still does not take away the fact that it makes perfect sense for christian parents to baptize their children.

It all depends on what you see baptism as. If you see it as an act of obedience towards God, then of course and infant cannot participate in that. If you see it as Gods act towards us--with promises of sins being washed away and new birth and having Gods name given to us, then it changes things a little. You are then bringing your infants to Christ.

Infants of course cannot repent, but the commands to repent were given to adult believers--then their households were baptized.

Given the ceremonial washings that were going on at that time THAT INCLUDED INFANTS, it would have made much more sense that infants were to be included in this new baptism. We have evidence from the earliest of Christianity that infants were in fact baptized and while other heresies were fought against very early on, we have no evidence of any fight for believers only baptism until the 16th century! This tells me that this is how it was always done--and given what the bible says about baptism, it makes sense.

The bible does NOT say that baptism is an outward sign of an inward grace.
THe bible does NOT say that baptism is act of obedience to Christ.

This is what it does say...

Galations 3:26-We are clothed with Christ!

Act2:38-we receive forgiveness of sins

Acts 22-We wash our sins away (what are you waiting for? the verse says!! that is an amazing scripture!)

Romans 6:3-We are united to Christ through his burial and resurrection


Just like I cannot give you one example of an infant baptized, YOU cannot give me one example of baptism language having anything to do with simple obedience, a personal testimony, or anything else. It is Gods amazing work!

Just as it is natural for christian parents to instruct and disciple our children in the ways of the faith, it is natural for christian parents to also baptize their children.

Now the tricky part

Just because an infant is baptized, it does not mean that when that infant grows old he or she will be walking in the faith..

just as..

Just because a grown adult makes a decision for Christ and participates in an adult baptism, when he or she grows older they will still be walking in the faith.

It makes far more sense for an infant/child to be baptized in the beginning, and be raised in the faith, than to be raised in the faith, believing, and then told that he or she needs to get saved. It honestly makes no sense. Faith is present, or it is not. Once again, it is not a decision.

ANd yes, sometimes it is by osmosis.

Sometimes someone hears the word of God and just starts to believe. The gift has been given and received. This has recently happened to my neice. She has started to believe. I am not going to confuse her with talk of decisions! I am simply going to continue to witness and give her scriptures. I am so happy!



But it is not God who is not faithful, it is we. If the prodigal returns, the father will be waiting.

The bible says that baptism saves. THE BIBLE SAYS THAT BAPTISM SAVES!!

Who am I to question that and speak differently on behalf of the word of God?

When you try to say that that isnt what the bible means, what you are doing is this..


"I know what the bible says, but what it means is.."

and thats dangerous territory, dont you think?

I'll go with my bible on this.

 

To Bob Ryan

Bob
No, Lutherans do not believe in OSAS. They leave that open because of things like the parable of the sower and the talk about enduring until the end.

They do believe election of course, but they do not believe in double predestination, because that goes against John3:16.

I think they believe that some things are just mysteries, but they wont speak where the bible does not.

 

To DHK

Liturgy doesnt appeal to the emotions.

It DOES appeal to the senses. Its a good thing. Helps to keep our attention where it should be.

Things like candles tell us that something special is going on.

No incense in my church, but I like the reminder that our prayers rise to God just like incense does.

Most of those things are symbolic, and actually quite nice. They help to focus our minds and hearts on worshipping Christ Jesus.

When we walk into church, we are quiet because we recognize that we are here to worship the almighty God. Silence can be very appropriate.

We also ring bells to signify that something special is going on. They did that when my children were baptized this weekend.

Bowing in church reminds us that we should bow down to Christ.

When I speak of worship, I am mostly speaking of the things we speak directly to God. That is lacking in a baptist church completely. Its more like a sing-a-long and bible study.

But singing or speaking the psalms--the praises--the kyrie--all are worship to God. EMotional? I spose it could be, but it isnt intended to be.

 

I definately agree with you there.

 

Well of course there are differences in times of persecution.

(you honestly think there werent candles in the catacombs? We do know that there was liturgy)

But we are not being persecuted right now, and so we feel free to have all those special things. I find all those traditions quite neat to say the least. Not necessary of course, but neat. We have the tradition of lighting candles and and standing for the reading of the gospel..

Its just traditions-like the lifting of the veil and the cutting of the cake at weddings. Those things arent necessary for a wedding to happen, but they are nice traditions.

When you learn what the traditions of the church mean, they are really cool!

Ever read the description of the temple? Sounds like it appealed to the senses.

There is nothing wrong with having the senses involved in worship. Nothing at all. Its very helpful actually. It creates an atmosphere of worship

 

You are kidding, right?

1 peter 3:21
Acts 2:38-39
Romans 6:3

Its there.

It is the baptists who explain it away.

 

We do read "believe and are baptized"

because this scripture was speaking to adult believers...who had not been baprtized of course. They were not talking to infants.

Infants are not mentioned.

But infants were brought to the ceremonial washings and other baptisms of the times. Baptism was not new. THIS baptism was new.

It is consistent with how God has done things (think circumcision, think children brought to priests.. unborn children even, dedicated to God, without them having a say at all) that christian parents would also bring their children to baptism-and then raise them in the faith.

I cant give you a scripture that says specifically that infants should be baptized. I agree. Its not there.

But infant baptism isnt inconsistent with scripture, it isnt inconsistent with the culture and what was going on, and we have no record of there being any fight until...dun dun dun dun... the baptists come to town! It wasnt mentioned I believe, because it didnt need to be. It was how it was always done. There is lots of evidence of early baptisms from some of the earliest christians.

The fight for believers only baptism'?

Silent.

Crickets chirping.

Believers only baptism is new.