Infant Baptism Is Just As Valid As Adult Baptism

[Drew]

All people who are baptized are believers FIRST. Get over it.

Do you really think this is proper way to conduct a debate. I have produced an argument - a series of statements that collectively make a case.

And your response? - A blank declaration, with no actual supporting argument, of the opposite position. And a dismissive "get over it" to boot.

Consider again what Paul writes here:

we were buried with him through baptism unto death

What is the end state of the person in this sentence? Obviously death? What is the means that has brought about death? Obviously baptism.

You guys seem to think that it still makes sense to get baptized as a testimony to something in the past.

Well, consider this statement, structurally identical to what Paul has written:

"I was protected from disease through vaccination unto immunity"

Now, suppose that, years after being vaccinated, I declare my wish to get vaccinated as a "testimony".

That, of course, would be nonsense. We already know what vaccination is about - it is about being delivered into the state of immunity. And this has already happened.

The same issue applies to baptism. Paul tells us part of what baptism does - it effects or brings about a death. It makes no more sense to be baptized to recall a past death than it does to get vaccinated to recall a past attainment of immunity.

 

[francisdesales]

And the member of the congregation would be right. Beware of when people bend or deform what the writer is saying into something other than what he has actually said. Like it or not, Paul declares - two times no less in this passage - that baptism is the event that brings about death. He does not say that baptism refects on, or remembers, or testifies to that death.

People in the protestant tradition do not want to let Paul say what he wants to say. I come from that traditon myself, but when I look at what Paul really wrote, I have to admit that "baptism as testimony" model is simply not consistent with what Paul has written.

Very good example. Another Scripture to note...

And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Col 2:10-13

Here, a plain comparison between circumcision and baptism. Again, as you say, note we are dead in sin UNTIL we are buried with Christ IN BAPTISM...

And people think baptism has no meaning? How ELSE are we "buried with Christ" to be "quickened TOGETHER with Him"???

Peter also compares the flood with the work of Baptism, which cleanses us of sin as the "old man" is washed away...

Regards

 

[Alabaster]

All people who are baptized are believers FIRST. Get over it.

Do you really think this is proper way to conduct a debate. I have produced an argument - a series of statements that collectively make a case.

And your response? - A blank declaration, with no actual supporting argument, of the opposite position. And a dismissive "get over it" to boot.

Consider again what Paul writes here:

we were buried with him through baptism unto death

What is the end state of the person in this sentence? Obviously death? What is the means that has brought about death? Obviously baptism.

You guys seem to think that it still makes sense to get baptized as a testimony to something in the past.

Well, consider this statement, structurally identical to what Paul has written:

"I was protected from disease through vaccination unto immunity"

Now, suppose that, years after being vaccinated, I declare my wish to get vaccinated as a "testimony".

That, of course, would be nonsense. We already know what vaccination is about - it is about being delivered into the state of immunity. And this has already happened.

The same issue applies to baptism. Paul tells us part of what baptism does - it effects or brings about a death. It makes no more sense to be baptized to recall a past death than it does to get vaccinated to recall a past attainment of immunity.

Baptism is an outward declaration of an inward work of God in the heart. It is symbolic of Jesus death and resurrection and that we identify with it.

There should be no debate on this among BELIEVERS.

 

[Drew]

Baptism is an outward declaration of an inward work of God in the heart. It is symbolic of Jesus death and resurrection and that we identify with it.

There should be no debate on this among BELIEVERS.

You are free to believe this, but the careful reader will know that you make such a statement without at all engaging a number of detailed arguments that suggest otherwise.

 

[Alabaster]

Baptism is an outward declaration of an inward work of God in the heart. It is symbolic of Jesus death and resurrection and that we identify with it.

There should be no debate on this among BELIEVERS.

You are free to believe this, but the careful reader will know that you make such a statement without at all engaging a number of detailed arguments that suggest otherwise.

There are no righteous arguments that prove otherwise--only subversions by people who want to further religiosity, and have a problem with spiritual understanding.

 

[Drew]

There are no righteous arguments that prove otherwise--only subversions by people who want to further religiosity, and have a problem with spiritual understanding.

Well, then, please actual show the errors in these arguments.

This is a frequent pattern on this board. When an argument is put forward that reaches a conclusion that someone does not like, the response is usually a combination of the following behaviours:

1. Ignore the argument
2. Attempt to cast aspersions on the motive of the person making the argument.

You have, of course, done both. You have simply not engaged my detailed argument about how Paul sees baptism as actually bringing about a death, and not as "reflecting on" or "testifying to" a death.

And you have implied that I am not a believer, that I have a motive to subvert, and that I lack spiritual understanding.

Well, it only takes "plain understanding" to see that you simply have not engaged my arguments.

 

[Alabaster]

There are no righteous arguments that prove otherwise--only subversions by people who want to further religiosity, and have a problem with spiritual understanding.

Well, then, please actual show the errors in these arguments.

This is a frequent pattern on this board. When an argument is put forward that reaches a conclusion that someone does not like, the response is usually a combination of the following behaviours:

1. Ignore the argument
2. Attempt to cast aspersions on the motive of the person making the argument.

You have, of course, done both. You have simply not engaged my detailed argument about how Paul sees baptism as actually bringing about a death, and not as "reflecting on" or "testifying to" a death.

And you have implied that I am not a believer, that I have a motive to subvert, and that I lack spiritual understanding.

Well, it only takes "plain understanding" to see that you simply have not engaged my arguments.

Paul doesn't agree with you. Purposeful subversion isn't done consciously--it is the enemy of our souls who causes men to misinterpret Scriptural truth, to appeal to one's religious comfort.

Simply know the Word--there won't be any argument if you do.

 

[Drew]

Paul doesn't agree with you. Purposeful subversion isn't done consciously--it is the enemy of our souls who causes men to misinterpret Scriptural truth, to appeal to one's religious comfort.

Simply know the Word--there won't be any argument if you do.

This is more of the same.

I have presented an argument about what Paul means when he talks about baptism. It was an actual argument with lots of details. The argument reaches a conclusion that contradicts the position you hold. Fine.

So what is your response? Do you dive in and engage the argument, showing where I have strayed off course.

No you do not. And that alone speaks volumes. A reader who is open-minded on this matter will no doubt conclude that if you could mount a counter-argument to what I have presented, you would.

And then, in the spirit of others in this thread that hold your position, you, cornered by an argument fatal to your postion, deploy the sad, tired, demonization card.

Apparently unable to counter the Paul argument I have provided, you start in with rhetoric aimed at my motivations and my competence.

What do you think the open-minded reader will conclude?

 

[Alabaster]

Paul doesn't agree with you. Purposeful subversion isn't done consciously--it is the enemy of our souls who causes men to misinterpret Scriptural truth, to appeal to one's religious comfort.

Simply know the Word--there won't be any argument if you do.

This is more of the same.

I have presented an argument about what Paul means when he talks about baptism. It was an actual argument with lots of details. The argument reaches a conclusion that contradicts the position you hold. Fine.

So what is your response? Do you dive in and engage the argument, showing where I have strayed off course.

No you do not. And that alone speaks volumes. A reader who is open-minded on this matter will no doubt conclude that if you could mount a counter-argument to what I have presented, you would.

A believer is not to be open-minded about false doctrine no matter what manner of detailed spin is put on it. I trust the Word of God that teaches that baptism is for the believer--babies are not believers. We are to train them up in the way they should go and let them find Christ for themselves and follow Him into baptism.

And then, in the spirit of others in this thread that hold your position, you, cornered by an argument fatal to your postion, deploy the sad, tired, demonization card.

I'm not cornered. Sorry, you feel demonized--that is not the intention. Conviction can often be mistaken for condemnation.

Religiosity n be a definitive sign of the spirit of religion, which is a demon.

Apparently unable to counter the Paul argument I have provided, you start in with rhetoric aimed at my motivations and my competence.

Paul is being countered by this false doctrine that babies need baptism.

What do you think the open-minded reader will conclude?

The open and susceptible mind can easily fall prey to your false doctrine.

 

[Drew]

Hello Alabaster:

I am not interested in responding to your posts which have no substantial argument about the matter at issue. If and when you respond to my Scriptural arguments, or provide some of your own, I will gladly re-engage.

 

[Alabaster]

Hello Alabaster:

I am not interested in responding to your posts which have no substantial argument about the matter at issue. If and when you respond to my Scriptural arguments, or provide some of your own, I will gladly re-engage.

Fine with me. it won't stop me from weighing in on the subject.

 

[Drew]

We have already seen how the view of baptism as testimony is inconsistent with what Paul writes in Romans 6. Why? Because when we pay attention to Paul, and not our traditions, we see that Paul clearly asserts that baptism is an event the brings about something, not an event that commemorates, reflects on, or otherwise attests to something.

And Jesus also uses the word baptism in this same sense - the sense in which baptism denotes a real and transformative event in the world and not a symbolic "re-enactment" or recollection or testifying to something else. From Mark 10:

37They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory."

38"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"

39"We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with,...

Just like Paul in Romans 6, Jesus here identifies baptism with his (Jesus') death. Not with a symbolic re-enactment of death, but with the death itself.

Baptism, here, as in Romans 6, clearly refers to the event of a real death and not to a testimony to a real death.

If we are, after all, meant to understand a baptism as a ceremony merely referring to, or re-calling, or testifying to a death, then Jesus is using the word in a very strange way indeed. Why? Because it is clear from context that He sees the event of his own death as a baptism.

Hardly a symbolic re-enactment. It's the "real deal"

 

[Solo]

The Lord Jesus Christ is the only intercessor of the body of Christ; there are no other intercessors. While we can pray for others, we cannot intercede for them as we are unworthy. The Scriptures show Jesus Christ as the only intercessor of the body of Christ, and only to those who come to the light. He does not intercede for unbelievers.

We are supposed to intercede as Christians. We are deemed worthy to do that by Christ. What we aren't worthy of is to mediate, which is Jesus' job. those who baptize infants are acting as some sort of intermediary between God and man. hoping to confer salvation upon a faithless infant.

Alabaster,

Out terminology and use of the word intercede is used when we pray for others, however, it is an unbiblical usage of the word intercede.

To intercede means to mediate and advocate for the body of Christ. We can only pray to Jesus Christ to intercede, mediate, advocate for the body of Christ. All who are lost are without Christ and do not have him to advocate, intercede, mediate their position. Only when they come to Him will he then intercede for them before the Father.

1 Timothy 2:1-2
I urge you, first of all, to pray for all people. Ask God to help them; intercede on their behalf, and give thanks for them. Pray this way for kings and all who are in authority so that we can live peaceful and quiet lives marked by godliness and dignity.

Alabaster,
I agree that we should pray, petition, supplicate those things in need by others; however, the term intercede has been taken out of context to mean pray for others in our time, but it goes deeper than that. When Christ Jesus intercedes for us, he is our one mediator, our one advocate with the Father, that He shows all of us to be IN HIM and HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS is imputed to us to HIS GLORY. When Jesus intercedes for us, it is a whole different undertaking, than when we pray for others!

If you reread my previous post, you will see that the Greek word á¼ÂνÄεÃÂξει enteuxis (ent'-yook-sis) is translated Intercede in the King James Version verse of 1 Timothy 2: 1 and is better translated petition, supplication, or prayer. The Greek word á¼ÂνÄÅγÇάνειν entugchano (en-toong-khan'-o) is used in the cases where Christ Jesus "makes intercession" for those of the body of Christ. The Greek word á¼ÂνÄÅγÇάνειν entugchano (en-toong-khan'-o) is defined:confer with; by extension to entreat (in favor or against) -- deal with, make intercession.

Again, when Christ Jesus makes intercession with the Father for one of His, it is a whole different "intercession" than when a believer prays for another.

Solo

 

[Solo]

Hello Alabaster:

I am not interested in responding to your posts which have no substantial argument about the matter at issue. If and when you respond to my Scriptural arguments, or provide some of your own, I will gladly re-engage.

Fine with me. it won't stop me from weighing in on the subject.

Alabaster,

There are just some who do not have ears to hear, nor eyes to see the truth given by the Holy Spirit. Do not be discouraged. ;)

 

[Drew]

There are just some who do not have ears to hear, nor eyes to see the truth given by the Holy Spirit. Do not be discouraged. ;)

It is a shame to see that you have not changed.

I have presented substantial arguments. And this is your response? Leave my arguments unchallenged and suggest that I am "outside" the circle of those enlightened with truth.

Now, please, if you have a real counter-argument to what I have posted, by all means have at it.

But can we please let the matter be discussed on its own merits? Anyone can claim that his opponent "does not have ears to hear". But do I do that? No I do not.

I discuss the scriptures, I do not suggest that those who disagree with me are not true believers.

 

[Alabaster]

The Lord Jesus Christ is the only intercessor of the body of Christ; there are no other intercessors. While we can pray for others, we cannot intercede for them as we are unworthy. The Scriptures show Jesus Christ as the only intercessor of the body of Christ, and only to those who come to the light. He does not intercede for unbelievers.

We are supposed to intercede as Christians. We are deemed worthy to do that by Christ. What we aren't worthy of is to mediate, which is Jesus' job. those who baptize infants are acting as some sort of intermediary between God and man. hoping to confer salvation upon a faithless infant.

Alabaster,

Out terminology and use of the word intercede is used when we pray for others, however, it is an unbiblical usage of the word intercede.

To intercede means to mediate and advocate for the body of Christ. We can only pray to Jesus Christ to intercede, mediate, advocate for the body of Christ. All who are lost are without Christ and do not have him to advocate, intercede, mediate their position. Only when they come to Him will he then intercede for them before the Father.

1 Timothy 2:1-2
I urge you, first of all, to pray for all people. Ask God to help them; intercede on their behalf, and give thanks for them. Pray this way for kings and all who are in authority so that we can live peaceful and quiet lives marked by godliness and dignity.

Alabaster,
I agree that we should pray, petition, supplicate those things in need by others; however, the term intercede has been taken out of context to mean pray for others in our time, but it goes deeper than that. When Christ Jesus intercedes for us, he is our one mediator, our one advocate with the Father, that He shows all of us to be IN HIM and HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS is imputed to us to HIS GLORY. When Jesus intercedes for us, it is a whole different undertaking, than when we pray for others!

If you reread my previous post, you will see that the Greek word á¼ÂνÄεÃÂξει enteuxis (ent'-yook-sis) is translated Intercede in the King James Version verse of 1 Timothy 2: 1 and is better translated petition, supplication, or prayer. The Greek word á¼ÂνÄÅγÇάνειν entugchano (en-toong-khan'-o) is used in the cases where Christ Jesus "makes intercession" for those of the body of Christ. The Greek word á¼ÂνÄÅγÇάνειν entugchano (en-toong-khan'-o) is defined:confer with; by extension to entreat (in favor or against) -- deal with, make intercession.

Again, when Christ Jesus makes intercession with the Father for one of His, it is a whole different "intercession" than when a believer prays for another.

Solo

We make intercession for others. wee satnd in the gap for them, as soldiers in the Army of God.

It is our place to intercede with the authority of Jesus Christ. That is more than supplication and petition.

Of course, Jesus is our intercessor with the Father, but we are intercessors for each other in Christ. There is no minimizing this fact.

 

[Solo]

We make intercession for others. we stand in the gap for them, as soldiers in the Army of God.

It is our place to intercede with the authority of Jesus Christ. That is more than supplication and petition.

Of course, Jesus is our intercessor with the Father, but we are intercessors for each other in Christ. There is no minimizing this fact.[/b]

The term intercession is misappropriated in the English language as it pertains to the act of Christ Jesus being the only intercessor for His children.

You and I are not worthy to make the intercession to God the Father in the manner that Jesus Christ makes intercession. When Jesus Christ makes intercession for us, he stands before the Father and declares that all who believe in Him are IN HIM and have HIS righteousness. God the Father sees His Son when He looks at us. This intercession is the intercession that the one mediator, the one advocate makes with the Father. We are not one that makes intercession, or mediates, or advocates for others before the Father.

We cannot INTERCEDE in this fashion for our righteousness apart from Christ Jesus is as filthy rags.

Now if I might ask you; what does a believer do when interceding for another that is more than supplication and petition? Casting out demons is not interceding. Can we forgive sins so that another will not suffer the penalty of sin? No. Only Jesus Christ, God Almighty can forgive sins.

 

[Alabaster]

We make intercession for others. we stand in the gap for them, as soldiers in the Army of God.

It is our place to intercede with the authority of Jesus Christ. That is more than supplication and petition.

Of course, Jesus is our intercessor with the Father, but we are intercessors for each other in Christ. There is no minimizing this fact.[/b]

The term intercession is misappropriated in the English language as it pertains to the act of Christ Jesus being the only intercessor for His children.

We are off topic, but that isn't true. We intercede for the brethren, and for any other need as we have authority to.

You and I are not worthy to make the intercession to God the Father in the manner that Jesus Christ makes intercession. When Jesus Christ makes intercession for us, he stands before the Father and declares that all who believe in Him are IN HIM and have HIS righteousness. God the Father sees His Son when He looks at us. This intercession is the intercession that the one mediator, the one advocate makes with the Father. We are not one that makes intercession, or mediates, or advocates for others before the Father.

I am made worthy by the blood of Jesus and by his power to intercede. Surely you know the difference between the intercession of Jesus--who has already done so on the cross--and our rightful authority to do so.

We cannot INTERCEDE in this fashion for our righteousness apart from Christ Jesus is as filthy rags.

Our righteousness as imputed to us by the blood of Christ is not deemed as filthy rags. Our obedience in this area of prayer is worthy of reward by the Father!

Now if I might ask you; what does a believer do when interceding for another that is more than supplication and petition? Casting out demons is not interceding. Can we forgive sins so that another will not suffer the penalty of sin? No. Only Jesus Christ, God Almighty can forgive sins.

Yes, it is speaking healing and deliverance, as well as victory.

You are speaking of mediation, not intercession, which is something only Jesus does.

 

[Solo]

You are speaking of mediation, not intercession, which is something only Jesus does.[/b]

I am speaking of mediation and intercession as outlined in the Scriptures.

Again, I list all of the verses of Scripture in the King James Version New Testament that utilizes the English word "intercede", and in each case it speaks of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit as interceding for us. Not our interceding for others.

Who is interceding for us in Romans 8:26 below? The Holy Spirit.

• Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Romans 8:26

Who is interceding for us in Romans 8:27 below? The Holy Spirit.

• And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God. Romans 8:27

Who is interceding for us in Romans 8:34 below? Jesus Christ.

• Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. Romans 8:34

Who is interceding for the Israelites as described in Romans 11:2 below? Elijah the prophet prior to the Lord Jesus Christ being born and the Holy Spirit being given to all with faith in Christ.

• God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, Romans 11:2

Who is interceding for us in 1 Timothy 2:1 below? The English word intercessions is translated from a different Greek word than all of the above, and is better translated petition as in the New American Standard Version instead of intercession. The Greek word á¼ÂνÄεÃÂξεÉ (enteuxeÃ…Âs) is used twice in the Scriptures and is translated "intercessions" in 1 Timothy 2:1, and is translated "prayer" in 1 Timothy 4:5. If you feel that prayer is what is meant by the phrase "make intercession", then there is no convincing you of what the Word of God says about it. The other verses of Scripture in the New Testament where the word intercession is used comes from the Greek word á¼ÂνÄÅγÇάνει (entunchanei).

• I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 1 Timothy 2:1

Who is interceding for us in Romans 8:34 below? Jesus Christ.

• Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:25

These are all of the verses of Scripture where the word á¼ÂνÄÅγÇάνει (entunchanei) - make intercession is used in the entire New Testament, and none of these instances speak of one believer being able to intercede for another believer. Show me in the Word of God where this occurs, and you will convince me. Otherwise, I will stand on the Word of God where Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit intercedes for the body of Christ.

 

[Alabaster]

You appear to be set in your thinking on this, and it is amiss. We intercede when we pray for others. We must do it. If we don't then Jesus is hindered. As Spirit-filled believers intercession is a normal part of our walk.

If you don't do it, you miss out on the victory you gain and others gain because of it. Good soldiers STAND IN THE GAP for each other! I choose to intercede with the authority of Jesus Christ, and my reward is sure.