An Article on free will

[Johann]

Now you know my story

(part of)

Glad to know "part of" your story Rella.

The practice of baptism (or more accurately, ritual washing or immersion) in ancient Jewish traditions, particularly during the Second Temple period, played a crucial role in the Jewish religious system. It is important to distinguish between Jewish ritual immersion and Christian baptism, though they share certain similarities, especially in the sense of purification or spiritual renewal.

Ancient Jewish Norms of Ritual Immersion

1. Mikveh (מִקְוֶה) – The Jewish Ritual Bath
The most common form of purification in ancient Judaism was the mikveh, a ritual bath used for purification. It involved full-body immersion in water, typically a natural source of water, such as a river or spring, or a specially constructed bath that could hold a specific volume of water.

Levitical Laws: The Torah (particularly in books like Leviticus and Numbers) outlines various situations in which immersion was required to restore ritual purity. These included:
Post-menstrual purity (Leviticus 15:19-30)
Purification after childbirth (Leviticus 12:6-8)
Cleansing from certain types of skin disease (Leviticus 14:8-9)
Conversion to Judaism (a Gentile becoming a proselyte to Judaism)

2. Mikveh and Conversion
Gentile Conversion: One of the most significant instances where immersion (mikveh) is prescribed is for Gentiles converting to Judaism. The process of proselyte conversion involved circumcision, offering a sacrifice (in the Temple period), and immersion in a mikveh. The mikveh served as a means of purification, symbolizing the individual's entrance into the Jewish faith and covenant. This is closely tied to the concept of spiritual rebirth in Jewish thought.
Infants and Baptism in Ancient Judaism

1. Infants and Ritual Purification
There is no evidence in ancient Jewish practice of infants being subjected to ritual immersion (mikveh) for purification in the same manner as adults. Ritual immersion in the mikveh was generally required for individuals to restore ritual purity, and infants, being inherently pure (since they had not yet reached the age of maturity to participate in actions that would render them impure), would not have been subject to this ritual.

2. Circumcision and Infants
While mikveh immersion did not typically apply to infants, circumcision (Brit Milah) was a critical rite for Jewish infants, performed on the eighth day after birth. Circumcision was a sign of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:9-14) and applied only to male infants.

This rite of circumcision signified an entry into the covenant, and was often seen as a sign of purification, but it did not involve immersion in water.

3. The Baptism of Proselytes and the Possible Role of Infants
While adult males undergoing conversion would have undergone ritual immersion, Jewish traditions do not document the immersion of infants in the mikveh. However, in the case of proselyte families, it is likely that adult family members (such as fathers or mothers) were the ones who would have been immersed, but infants would not have undergone the immersion ritual. Instead, infants would likely have been circumcised (if male) and possibly presented in the Temple for purification rites later.

Conclusion on Infants and Baptism in Ancient Judaism
In ancient Jewish tradition, ritual immersion (mikveh) was an important part of religious life, but it was not applied to infants. Instead, infants were typically circumcised (in the case of males) as a sign of entry into the Jewish covenant. The concept of infant baptism as practiced in some Christian traditions was not part of ancient Jewish ritual law or practice, though Jewish rituals for purification (such as circumcision) were important for infant boys.

The closest parallel to the Christian practice of infant baptism might be found in the circumcision of infants, which marked an important spiritual and covenantal moment, but this did not include immersion in a mikveh.

--but I was water baptized [ Just in case]--

Johann.

 

[MTMattie]

Glad to know "part of" your story Rella.

The practice of baptism (or more accurately, ritual washing or immersion) in ancient Jewish traditions, particularly during the Second Temple period, played a crucial role in the Jewish religious system. It is important to distinguish between Jewish ritual immersion and Christian baptism, though they share certain similarities, especially in the sense of purification or spiritual renewal.

Ancient Jewish Norms of Ritual Immersion

1. Mikveh (מִקְוֶה) – The Jewish Ritual Bath
The most common form of purification in ancient Judaism was the mikveh, a ritual bath used for purification. It involved full-body immersion in water, typically a natural source of water, such as a river or spring, or a specially constructed bath that could hold a specific volume of water.

Levitical Laws: The Torah (particularly in books like Leviticus and Numbers) outlines various situations in which immersion was required to restore ritual purity. These included:
Post-menstrual purity (Leviticus 15:19-30)
Purification after childbirth (Leviticus 12:6-8)
Cleansing from certain types of skin disease (Leviticus 14:8-9)
Conversion to Judaism (a Gentile becoming a proselyte to Judaism)

2. Mikveh and Conversion
Gentile Conversion: One of the most significant instances where immersion (mikveh) is prescribed is for Gentiles converting to Judaism. The process of proselyte conversion involved circumcision, offering a sacrifice (in the Temple period), and immersion in a mikveh. The mikveh served as a means of purification, symbolizing the individual's entrance into the Jewish faith and covenant. This is closely tied to the concept of spiritual rebirth in Jewish thought.
Infants and Baptism in Ancient Judaism

1. Infants and Ritual Purification
There is no evidence in ancient Jewish practice of infants being subjected to ritual immersion (mikveh) for purification in the same manner as adults. Ritual immersion in the mikveh was generally required for individuals to restore ritual purity, and infants, being inherently pure (since they had not yet reached the age of maturity to participate in actions that would render them impure), would not have been subject to this ritual.

2. Circumcision and Infants
While mikveh immersion did not typically apply to infants, circumcision (Brit Milah) was a critical rite for Jewish infants, performed on the eighth day after birth. Circumcision was a sign of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:9-14) and applied only to male infants.

This rite of circumcision signified an entry into the covenant, and was often seen as a sign of purification, but it did not involve immersion in water.

3. The Baptism of Proselytes and the Possible Role of Infants
While adult males undergoing conversion would have undergone ritual immersion, Jewish traditions do not document the immersion of infants in the mikveh. However, in the case of proselyte families, it is likely that adult family members (such as fathers or mothers) were the ones who would have been immersed, but infants would not have undergone the immersion ritual. Instead, infants would likely have been circumcised (if male) and possibly presented in the Temple for purification rites later.

Conclusion on Infants and Baptism in Ancient Judaism
In ancient Jewish tradition, ritual immersion (mikveh) was an important part of religious life, but it was not applied to infants. Instead, infants were typically circumcised (in the case of males) as a sign of entry into the Jewish covenant. The concept of infant baptism as practiced in some Christian traditions was not part of ancient Jewish ritual law or practice, though Jewish rituals for purification (such as circumcision) were important for infant boys.

The closest parallel to the Christian practice of infant baptism might be found in the circumcision of infants, which marked an important spiritual and covenantal moment, but this did not include immersion in a mikveh.

--but I was water baptized [ Just in case]--

Johann.

Thank Johann.

Just a bit more of my story.

11 or 12 years ago I joined my first forum and after a few months it went belly up.

I found a replacement... after painfully hitting the pen pal sites... (oh my) .. and landed on a smaller forum with what I thought were
very nice people with differing beliefs then mine and it was through that forum I was jumped all over by several members of the church of Christ.
So much so that they had me convinced after quite a long time that I was not now, then or ever would be saved because of my baby baptism.

After a while I started to seek out local churches that would re- baptize me , my mother, a couple of friends, etc.

There was one Catholic one, but we would have had to become Catholic.

There was one Baptist one, but the minister had to get clearance to do it and he did... but we were going to need to do it in front of the congregation one Sunday morning and my mom was not willing. ( We both wanted Eunuch style)

So someone on that forum said to try the coC and I called one of them located in the heart of a Jewish population here ??? And who I talked to said they could, but when I said mom had an issue with steps he told me to try another closer to me as they have no steps.

So I called and we had a meeting in my living room. Mom, me and 2 of our friends

Meeting lasted for about an hour and he said he would take the info to the church and get back to me. He said their baptimal font was with heated water. (I always heard it was to be cool if not cold...) But they had a few steps to go up and then down into the water and
he said they could help mom.... A week or so later we talked again and now the answer was no. they decided against it because they also
wanted us to join their church so they could dialogue with us.

About 2 month after that one of our friends heard about a church 45 min away who did weekly baptisms in the evening.
The hitch... for me.... Anyone could come. It did not matter the reason you wanted one, they just did them. So I declined.

Oh... at the time we were going to try to go to FL for a month one winter. A friend from that forum offered that if we wanted to
stop along the way he would baptise us in his swimming pools. We actually were planning to do that... mom and me.... but then mom got
afraid to be so far from home for so long a time and the trip never happened.

After that I am leaving it up to God. If He want me re-baptized he will make it happen.

Now you know the end of this story....

But as I was reading your explanations above I remembered about a baptismal font

Archaeologists Discover Ancient Baptismal Font Hidden Inside Jesus' Traditional Birthplace

Archaeologists have discovered a baptismal font dating to the 6th or 7th century A.D., hidden inside another baptismal font in the Church of the Nativity.

www.livescience.com

Archaeologists Discover Ancient Baptismal Font Hidden Inside Jesus' Traditional Birthplace​

I still want to know what the little font was for. Holy Water? Babies? or Feet?

The Church of the Nativity — a World Heritage site believed to house the birthplace of Jesus in the West Bank city of Bethlehem — is apparently so holy that there are baptismal fonts coming out of the baptismal fonts.






AND https://www.foxnews.com/science/baptismal-font-discovered-bethlehem-church-of-the-nativity

 

[Johann]

I found a replacement... after painfully hitting the pen pal sites... (oh my) .. and landed on a smaller forum with what I thought were
very nice people with differing beliefs then mine and it was through that forum I was jumped all over by several members of the church of Christ.
So much so that they had me convinced after quite a long time that I was not now, then or ever would be saved because of my baby baptism.

If you want to make a case for infant baptism, it is not in Scripture @MTMattie and forums can be persuasive. What church of Christ are you referring to?

There was one Baptist one, but the minister had to get clearance to do it and he did... but we were going to need to do it in front of the congregation one Sunday morning and my mom was not willing. ( We both wanted Eunuch style)

Eunuch style? First time for me.

After that I am leaving it up to God. If He want me re-baptized he will make it happen.

Now you know the end of this story....

But as I was reading your explanations above I remembered about a baptismal font

I completely understand your experience, as I've had a tumultuous journey with the Pentecostals and the Pentecostal Protestants—three sister churches—and even fell into Calvinism for a couple of years, which still affects me to this day. After all, our salvation is on the line here.

When it comes to baptism, it can be a tricky and confusing topic that often leads to strong disagreements between brothers and sisters, sometimes even escalating to personal attacks.

I also don't place much confidence in the writings of the Early Church Fathers.

It's good to hear your full story, Rella.

God bless.

J.

 

[Kermos]

projecting again since its your doctrine of fatalism thats false not ours. You twist the scriptures just like the devil. John 8:44.

To @civic and @MTMattie (due to your "Like"/agreement of civic's post),

MTMattie issued the false prophecy, not I. See proof post #6,581.

You called the one and only true Lord Jesus Christ your "the devil" in your post with specific reference to:

​

You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.​

(Lord Jesus Christ, John 8:44)​

​

As a blessed Christian in Christ, the work of God is that I believe in Him whom He has sent (John 6:29) according to Christ who is the Truth (John 14:6), so you calling me a follower of "the devil" means that you insult my loving Leader Jesus Christ by calling Christ your wicked "the devil", and no Christian applies the devil as a title for Lord Jesus Christ. Lord and God Jesus Christ is Love and Life (John 14:6, 1 John 4:16)!

You Free-willians think you are free to insult Lord Jesus Christ by your delusionally associating an intimate relationship of Christ with "Beelzebul". You lie about the Father in Heaven for the Father is good (Mark 10:18), not your conveyed evil! My loving Father in Heaven sent His Son Jesus to redeem us beyond self-help wretches!

So very much Word of God is nullified in your heart (Matthew 15:16-19, Matthew 6:21) that I wonder if you can even see "If I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges" (Matthew 12:27).

We Christians sing Christ's Sovereignty of God song that God is so very Holy that we cannot approach this Loving King Jesus without being summoned and chosen by His Holiness; in contrast, the daringly self-willed (2 Peter 2:9-10) Free-willian Philosophers sing the traditions of men (Matthew 15:9) sour song about man choosing His Holiness:

The False of Your Free-willism		The Truth of God
you twelve apostles did not choose Me, but I chose exclusively you apostles without choosing anyone else (civic 15:16 (proof post #1,203)		you did not choose Me, but I chose you (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16)
I chose nobody except you 12 disciples out of the world (civic 15:19 (proof post #1,203)		I chose you out of the world (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19)
This is not the work of God but this is the work of man, that you believe in Him whom He has sent (the tradition of civic 6:29, proof post #2,495)		This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent (The Word of God, John 6:29)
he who free-will practices the Truth free-will comes to the Light, so that his works may be manifested as having been worked in himself, not God (the Book of Free-willians 3:21, post #6,580)		he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, so that his works may be manifested as having been worked in God (The Gospel of God, John 3:21)
Truly, truly, I say to you, before one is born again he can see the Kingdom of God[ (civic 3:3)		Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God (Lord Jesus Christ, John 3:3)
I praise you, man, lord of yourself, that you have free-will chosen to bring about understanding of hidden things and shown yourself to be wise and intelligent and have revealed them to yourself (Free-willians 11:25, proof post #4,015)		I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to babes (Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew 11:25)
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even according to your fleshly love, that you also love one another (civic 13:34, proof post #6,298)		A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another (Lord Jesus Christ, John 13:34)

We Christians sing the sweet song of the power of God to the glory of God! The Word of God is beautiful - to God be all honor and glory and power and dominion forever and ever! Praise be to the Christ of us Christians.

You free-willians sing the sour song of the power of man to the glory of man!

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE TO THE FATHER OF MY LORD JESUS CHRIST, MY GOD AND MY KING, TO HIM I SING, IN HIS GREAT MERCY HE HAS GIVEN US LIFE, SO WE CAN BE CALLED THE CHILDREN OF GOD!!!

 

[Johann]

To @civic and @MTMattie (due to your "Like"/agreement of civic's post),

MTMattie issued the false prophecy, not I. See proof post #6,581.

You called the one and only true Lord Jesus Christ your "the devil" in your post with specific reference to:

​

You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.​

(Lord Jesus Christ, John 8:44)​

​

As a blessed Christian in Christ, the work of God is that I believe in Him whom He has sent (John 6:29) according to Christ who is the Truth (John 14:6), so you calling me a follower of "the devil" means that you insult my loving Leader Jesus Christ by calling Christ your wicked "the devil", and no Christian applies the devil as a title for Lord Jesus Christ. Lord and God Jesus Christ is Love and Life (John 14:6, 1 John 4:16)!

You Free-willians think you are free to insult Lord Jesus Christ by your delusionally associating an intimate relationship of Christ with "Beelzebul". You lie about the Father in Heaven for the Father is good (Mark 10:18), not your conveyed evil! My loving Father in Heaven sent His Son Jesus to redeem us beyond self-help wretches!

So very much Word of God is nullified in your heart (Matthew 15:16-19, Matthew 6:21) that I wonder if you can even see "If I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges" (Matthew 12:27).

We Christians sing Christ's Sovereignty of God song that God is so very Holy that we cannot approach this Loving King Jesus without being summoned and chosen by His Holiness; in contrast, the daringly self-willed (2 Peter 2:9-10) Free-willian Philosophers sing the traditions of men (Matthew 15:9) sour song about man choosing His Holiness:

The False of Your Free-willism		The Truth of God
you twelve apostles did not choose Me, but I chose exclusively you apostles without choosing anyone else (civic 15:16 (proof post #1,203)		you did not choose Me, but I chose you (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16)
I chose nobody except you 12 disciples out of the world (civic 15:19 (proof post #1,203)		I chose you out of the world (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19)
This is not the work of God but this is the work of man, that you believe in Him whom He has sent (the tradition of civic 6:29, proof post #2,495)		This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent (The Word of God, John 6:29)
he who free-will practices the Truth free-will comes to the Light, so that his works may be manifested as having been worked in himself, not God (the Book of Free-willians 3:21, post #6,580)		he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, so that his works may be manifested as having been worked in God (The Gospel of God, John 3:21)
Truly, truly, I say to you, before one is born again he can see the Kingdom of God[ (civic 3:3)		Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God (Lord Jesus Christ, John 3:3)
I praise you, man, lord of yourself, that you have free-will chosen to bring about understanding of hidden things and shown yourself to be wise and intelligent and have revealed them to yourself (Free-willians 11:25, proof post #4,015)		I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to babes (Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew 11:25)
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even according to your fleshly love, that you also love one another (civic 13:34, proof post #6,298)		A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another (Lord Jesus Christ, John 13:34)

We Christians sing the sweet song of the power of God to the glory of God! The Word of God is beautiful - to God be all honor and glory and power and dominion forever and ever! Praise be to the Christ of us Christians.

You free-willians sing the sour song of the power of man to the glory of man!

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE TO THE FATHER OF MY LORD JESUS CHRIST, MY GOD AND MY KING, TO HIM I SING, IN HIS GREAT MERCY HE HAS GIVEN US LIFE, SO WE CAN BE CALLED THE CHILDREN OF GOD!!!

The Conflicting, Perplexing Calvinistic Doctrine of Free Will (Part Two)

Part One Calvinists say that other systems limit God's sovereignty or control. Apparently when those systems assign to man free will, they...

kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com

Election and “The Elect”

Without a doubt, “election” is a Christian doctrine. The question is, what is election, and how is one elected? Are Calvinists correct to say that God pre-ordains some particular men t…

israeliteindeed.wordpress.com

J.

 

[civic]

To @civic and @MTMattie (due to your "Like"/agreement of civic's post),

MTMattie issued the false prophecy, not I. See proof post #6,581.

You called the one and only true Lord Jesus Christ your "the devil" in your post with specific reference to:

​

You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.​

(Lord Jesus Christ, John 8:44)​

​

As a blessed Christian in Christ, the work of God is that I believe in Him whom He has sent (John 6:29) according to Christ who is the Truth (John 14:6), so you calling me a follower of "the devil" means that you insult my loving Leader Jesus Christ by calling Christ your wicked "the devil", and no Christian applies the devil as a title for Lord Jesus Christ. Lord and God Jesus Christ is Love and Life (John 14:6, 1 John 4:16)!

You Free-willians think you are free to insult Lord Jesus Christ by your delusionally associating an intimate relationship of Christ with "Beelzebul". You lie about the Father in Heaven for the Father is good (Mark 10:18), not your conveyed evil! My loving Father in Heaven sent His Son Jesus to redeem us beyond self-help wretches!

So very much Word of God is nullified in your heart (Matthew 15:16-19, Matthew 6:21) that I wonder if you can even see "If I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges" (Matthew 12:27).

We Christians sing Christ's Sovereignty of God song that God is so very Holy that we cannot approach this Loving King Jesus without being summoned and chosen by His Holiness; in contrast, the daringly self-willed (2 Peter 2:9-10) Free-willian Philosophers sing the traditions of men (Matthew 15:9) sour song about man choosing His Holiness:

The False of Your Free-willism		The Truth of God
you twelve apostles did not choose Me, but I chose exclusively you apostles without choosing anyone else (civic 15:16 (proof post #1,203)		you did not choose Me, but I chose you (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16)
I chose nobody except you 12 disciples out of the world (civic 15:19 (proof post #1,203)		I chose you out of the world (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19)
This is not the work of God but this is the work of man, that you believe in Him whom He has sent (the tradition of civic 6:29, proof post #2,495)		This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent (The Word of God, John 6:29)
he who free-will practices the Truth free-will comes to the Light, so that his works may be manifested as having been worked in himself, not God (the Book of Free-willians 3:21, post #6,580)		he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, so that his works may be manifested as having been worked in God (The Gospel of God, John 3:21)
Truly, truly, I say to you, before one is born again he can see the Kingdom of God[ (civic 3:3)		Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God (Lord Jesus Christ, John 3:3)
I praise you, man, lord of yourself, that you have free-will chosen to bring about understanding of hidden things and shown yourself to be wise and intelligent and have revealed them to yourself (Free-willians 11:25, proof post #4,015)		I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to babes (Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew 11:25)
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even according to your fleshly love, that you also love one another (civic 13:34, proof post #6,298)		A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another (Lord Jesus Christ, John 13:34)

We Christians sing the sweet song of the power of God to the glory of God! The Word of God is beautiful - to God be all honor and glory and power and dominion forever and ever! Praise be to the Christ of us Christians.

You free-willians sing the sour song of the power of man to the glory of man!

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE TO THE FATHER OF MY LORD JESUS CHRIST, MY GOD AND MY KING, TO HIM I SING, IN HIS GREAT MERCY HE HAS GIVEN US LIFE, SO WE CAN BE CALLED THE CHILDREN OF GOD!!!

He did no such thing you are bearing false witness. You are the one Jesus is describing in John 8:39-45.

 

[MTMattie]

If you want to make a case for infant baptism, it is not in Scripture @MTMattie and forums can be persuasive. What church of Christ are you referring to?

I am referring to the " Church of Christ"

This link is extensive in explanation https://www.churchofchrist1830.org/basic-beliefs

This one also explains wont allow one to copy. https://christianityfaq.com/what-does-the-church-of-christ-believe/
Their big thing usually is "baptism saves" Re" Mark 16:16
Although they also allow no musical instruments there. All singing is a cappella.

What Is the Church of Christ?

The New Testament gives a clear picture of what the church was under the leadership of the Lord's apostles. The church's origin was divine; it continues to be subject to the authority of Christ. Should it not be the same today - simply, the church of Christ?

christiancourier.com

What Is the Church of Christ?​

The New Testament gives a clear picture of what the church was under the leadership of the Lord’s apostles. The church’s origin was divine; it continues to be subject to the authority of Christ. Should it not be the same today — simply, the church of Christ?

Eunuch style? First time for me.

I should have said privately.... as the Eunuch had.

I completely understand your experience, as I've had a tumultuous journey with the Pentecostals and the Pentecostal Protestants—three sister churches—and even fell into Calvinism for a couple of years, which still affects me to this day. After all, our salvation is on the line here.

When it comes to baptism, it can be a tricky and confusing topic that often leads to strong disagreements between brothers and sisters, sometimes even escalating to personal attacks.

I also don't place much confidence in the writings of the Early Church Fathers.

It's good to hear your full story, Rella.

God bless.

J.

 

[Johann]

This link is extensive in explanation https://www.churchofchrist1830.org/basic-beliefs

The Scripture, contained in the Holy Bible and Book of Mormon, is the inerrant and inspired word of God in the original manuscripts. It is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”1 12 Timothy 3:16-17

This one @MTMattie? Or Methodist?

And I don't believe baptism saves-told you, this is going to cause a rift between us.

J.

 

[MTMattie]

The Scripture, contained in the Holy Bible and Book of Mormon, is the inerrant and inspired word of God in the original manuscripts. It is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”1 12 Timothy 3:16-17

This one @MTMattie? Or Methodist?

And I don't believe baptism saves-told you, this is going to cause a rift between us.

J.

Johann, I know baptism does not save. But when you have neigh onto a dozen posters jumping all over a forum greenhorn that I was
back then they sounded so sure and not a lot of opposition from others at that time.

I had one who messaged me and told me I had to grow __________. (You fill it in) If I was going to survive there.

At the time I had no knowledge of other forums so I did grow _______ and stood my ground especially when it was their very own preciouses (to them) church that denied me when they kept telling me it would be fine.

I have no idea what you mean by ~"This one @MTMattie? Or Methodist?"

And if this causes a rift between us? .... well, it's been nice.

 

[Johann]

Johann, I know baptism does not save. But when you have neigh onto a dozen posters jumping all over a forum greenhorn that I was
back then they sounded so sure and not a lot of opposition from others at that time.

I had one who messaged me and told me I had to grow __________. (You fill it in) If I was going to survive there.

At the time I had no knowledge of other forums so I did grow _______ and stood my ground especially when it was their very own preciouses (to them) church that denied me when they kept telling me it would be fine.

I have no idea what you mean by ~"This one @MTMattie? Or Methodist?"

And if this causes a rift between us? .... well, it's been nice.

What was nice Rella?

2 Peter 3:18 – "But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever. Amen."

"but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior" This is a PRESENT ACTIVE IMPERATIVE. It has been a central theme of the book. Believers guard against error by growing in the knowledge of the gospel and living out the gospel. This is parallel to Jude 20.

J.

 

[synergy]

I don't- no offense.

. Biblical Pattern of Baptism: Always Tied to Faith
Matthew 28:19-20 – Jesus commands, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you."

Baptism follows discipleship and teaching, which presupposes faith and understanding. Infants cannot be taught or become disciples.

Mark 16:16 – "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe shall be condemned."

Faith precedes baptism, and unbelief results in condemnation. Infants cannot believe or disbelieve.

Acts 2:38 – Peter preaches, "Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Baptism is linked to repentance, which an infant cannot do.

Acts 8:12 – "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women."

Baptism follows belief. No mention of infants.

Acts 8:36-38 – The Ethiopian eunuch asks, "What hinders me from being baptized?" Philip responds, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." The eunuch confesses faith, and only then is he baptized.

Again, faith is a prerequisite for baptism.
Acts 10:47-48 – Cornelius and his household receive the Holy Spirit, and Peter commands them to be baptized.

There is no indication of infants; those baptized had received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (Acts 10:44-46).

Acts 16:30-34 – The Philippian jailer asks, "What must I do to be saved?" Paul responds, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved, you and your household." They then spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all in his house, and afterward, they were baptized.

The text implies that all who were baptized had heard and understood the Word.
Acts 18:8 – "Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his household; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed and were baptized."

Faith precedes baptism.
Romans 6:3-4 – "Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death, so that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so, we also should walk in newness of life."

Baptism symbolizes death to sin and a new life in Christ, which requires a personal faith commitment.
Colossians 2:12 – "Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also you are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God."

Baptism is connected to faith, making it incompatible with infant baptism.

2. Household Baptisms: Any Evidence of Infants?
Some argue that because "households" were baptized (e.g., Acts 16:15, 16:33, 1 Corinthians 1:16), infants might have been included. However, in each case, belief is explicitly mentioned:

Acts 16:34 – The jailer "rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household."
Acts 18:8 – "Crispus believed on the Lord with all his house."
John 4:53 – Another instance of a household coming to faith: "He himself believed, and his whole household."
In every instance, faith is attributed to the whole household. Infants cannot exercise faith, so it is unwarranted to assume their inclusion in these baptisms.

3. Arguments for Infant Baptism and Their Refutation

1. Parallel with Circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12)?
Some argue that baptism replaces circumcision because both are signs of the covenant.

However, baptism requires faith (Colossians 2:12), while circumcision was given to infant males under the Old Covenant.
Circumcision was not based on personal faith, but baptism always follows belief in the New Testament.

2. "Let the little children come to Me" (Matthew 19:14)?
Jesus blesses children, but He does not baptize them.
There is no mention of infants being baptized anywhere in the New Testament.

3. "Your children are holy" (1 Corinthians 7:14)?
The verse speaks of relational sanctification (a believing parent having an influence on their children), not baptism.
It does not say children of believers are saved or should be baptized.

4. Early Church History on Infant Baptism
No clear evidence of infant baptism in the first 150 years.

Tertullian (c. 200 AD) opposed infant baptism, saying that children should wait until they can personally choose faith (On Baptism, 18).

Origen (c. 250 AD) mentions the practice but does not claim it was apostolic.

Augustine (c. 400 AD) argued for infant baptism based on his doctrine of original sin, but this was not an apostolic teaching.

Conclusion: No Biblical Evidence for Infant Baptism

Every instance of baptism in the New Testament is tied to faith, repentance, and belief, which infants cannot do.
Household baptisms do not provide evidence for infant baptism, as they involve those who heard, believed, and rejoiced in the Lord.
Arguments from circumcision, Jesus' blessing of children, or 1 Corinthians 7:14 are misapplied and do not teach infant baptism.

The early church did not uniformly practice infant baptism, and opposition existed in the early centuries.

Thus, Scripture does not support infant baptism—only believers' baptism (credobaptism).

I know you are going to oppose this @synergy.

J.

Thank you for forwarding your understanding of infant baptism. Besides the archeological evidence that does support the Apostolic/Early Church practice of Infant Baptism, the following is also further proof of that Apostolic practice:

Bible Audience
First of all, many people fail to understand who the audience (target group) of the Bible is. The Bible is directed to those who can read or can cognitively listen and that demands a level of cognition that obviously infants do not possess. That's why if you want to learn about infant baptism, you must go to baptismal verses that actually refer to or that actually involve infants such as Acts 2:38-39 and 1 Corinthians 10:1-4.

Acts 2:38-39
“And Peter said to them, ‘Repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself ” (Acts 2:38,39).

That’s the promise of the Holy Spirit for all children under the authority of their parents. That authority held until the child was at least 13 years of age at which point he or she was usually married off and no longer under their parents’ authority.

Baptism of Moses
Moses’ leading his people through the Red Sea is seen as an Old Testament foreshadowing of Christian baptism. The following New Testament passage clearly points to this: “For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them, and that rock was Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) It is worthwhile to note that “all were baptized” through Moses’ leadership in crossing over the Red Sea. He did not leave the infants or children on the shores of Egypt to become prey to the angry armies of Pharaoh because they were not old enough to believe in the promise of the Old Covenant. Rather, entrusted to the arms of their parents’ faith, they were carried through the “baptism of Moses.”

Where is the Alternative to Infant Baptism?
If the baptism of infants was not acceptable during New Testament times, then when does Scripture mention the alternative – the baptism of the children of Christian parents once they have matured out of infancy? The Bible never gives one example of the baptism of a Christian child as an adult. It is important that Scripture also does not speak of an “age of accountability or reason” (which many pinpoint at 13 years) when a child’s capacity to believe the Gospel is developed enough so that he can receive baptism. Neither does the Bible state that every child is in a “suspended state of salvation” until they have reached this age, which one would have to believe if he held to the “age of accountability” theory.

Baptism is not just a metaphor
Baptism is not just a symbolic testimony of what God has done in the heart of an adult believer, but is in itself a dynamic means of actually effecting the power of the Gospel (the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ) in a life (Romans 6:4). Christian baptism is the means whereby we encounter and identify with Jesus Christ Himself. This is one of the reasons why Paul explains baptism as the manner in which we genuinely “put on” or “clothe” ourselves with Christ (Galatians 3:27).

History
There is no evidence that anyone being against infant baptism in the early Church on the grounds that you must first “believe” and be baptized. Tertulian (160 230 A.D.), was the only one who questioned infant baptism. The bulk of his objection, however, was due to his heresy that sin after baptism was unforgivable.
That proves that from Apostolic times all the way to Anabaptist times, there was no issue with infant baptism as a whole. If you want to side with the anti-Apostolic Anabaptists then be my guest.

Infant Baptism is not enough
Of course, Baptism in and of itself is not enough. It must be accompanied by genuine faith. No parents should be allowed to baptize their infant if they themselves have not made an expressed commitment to serve Jesus Christ and raise their child in accordance with God’s Word. As adults, we are called to accept the challenge of our baptism and live dedicated lives for Christ. If we do any less, we have rejected Christ and the gift of salvation He has made available to us since our birth.

 

[Johann]

Thank you for forwarding your understanding of infant baptism. Besides the archeological evidence that supports the Apostolic/Early Church practice of Infant Baptism, the following is also further proof of that Apostolic practice:

Bible Audience
First of all, many people fail to understand who the audience (target group) of the Bible is. The Bible is directed to those who can read or can cognitively listen and that demands a level of cognition that obviously infants do not possess. That's why if you want to learn about infant baptism, you must go to baptismal verses that actually refer to or that actually involve infants such as Acts 2:38-39 and 1 Corinthians 10:1-4.

This is error.

Misunderstanding the Audience of Scripture
Your claim that the Bible is written only for those who can read or cognitively listen does not exclude infants from its scope. Rather, Scripture constantly affirms that faith comes through hearing (Romans 10:17), which presumes personal belief and understanding—something that infants are not capable of exercising.

John 20:31 – "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."

Acts 16:31 – "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." (Belief is the requirement for salvation, not ritual baptism alone.)

Mark 16:16 – "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Faith precedes baptism.)

2. Acts 2:38-39 Does Not Teach Infant Baptism
Acts 2:38-39 is commonly misinterpreted to support paedobaptism (infant baptism), but a closer look reveals otherwise:

2:38 "Repent" This is an AORIST ACTIVE IMPERATIVE which means make a decisive decision. The Hebrew term for repentance meant a change of action. The Greek term meant a change of mind (see 2 Cor. 7:8-11). Repentance is a willingness to change. It does not mean a total cessation of sin, but a desire to please God, not self. As fallen humanity we live for ourselves, but as believers we live for God! Repentance and faith are God's requirements for salvation (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16, 19; 20:21). Jesus said "Unless you repent, you will all perish" (cf. Luke. 13:3,5). Repentance is God's will for fallen man (cf. 2 Pet. 3:9, Ezek. 18:23, 30, 32). The mystery of the sovereignty of God and human free will can be clearly demonstrated by repentance as a requirement for salvation. However, the paradox or dialectic pair is that it is also a gift of God (cf. Acts 5:31; 11:18 and 2 Tim. 2:25). There is always a tension in the biblical presentation of God's initiating grace and humanity's needed covenantal response. The new covenant, like the old covenant, has an "if. . .then" structure. There are several terms used in the NT which relate to the concept of repentance.

Acts 2:38-39 – "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call."

Why This Does Not Support Infant Baptism:
Repentance Precedes Baptism – The command to repent is given before baptism. Infants cannot repent, making this passage inapplicable to them.

The "Promise" Refers to Salvation, Not Baptism – The passage does not specify infant baptism, only that salvation is available to all generations whom the Lord calls.

"Children" Does Not Exclusively Mean Infants – The Greek word τέκνα (tekna) simply means "descendants" or "offspring," and does not necessitate infants.

Thus, Acts 2:38-39 does not prove infant baptism. Instead, it reinforces the pattern of repentance preceding baptism.

3. The "Baptism of Moses" in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 Is Not Literal Baptism


"were baptized into Moses" The Greek manuscripts vary between PASSIVE VOICE (i.e., MSS א, A, C, D) and MIDDLE VOICE (i.e., MS B). The UBS4 cannot decide which is original, but puts the PASSIVE in the text. It seems to me the MIDDLE VOICE is contextually appropriate in emphasizing the volitional decision of the Israelites to follow Moses and the historical fact the Jewish proselyte baptism was self administered.

This is an unusual phrase, found only here in the NT. It implies a parallel between the responsibility and privilege of the Mosaic covenant, and the New Covenant in Christ; both are from God and in some ways are similar. Here baptism is used as a symbol for one who follows.

There is a rabbinical tradition going back to Hillel (cf. b Ker 9a; bYeb 46a) which relates proselyte baptism to the Red Sea event. See Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, pp. 102-103.

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 – "Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea."
This passage is metaphorical and does not refer to water baptism as practiced in the New Testament. Key observations:

Israelites "Passed Through" the Sea Without Getting Wet – Unlike New Testament baptism, which involves immersion, the Israelites passed through the Red Sea on dry ground (Exodus 14:22).

No Active Faith Required from Infants – This analogy does not teach baptismal regeneration but rather deliverance through faith in God's power.

Paul's Point is Spiritual Nourishment – The passage emphasizes spiritual sustenance from Christ, not a doctrinal argument for paedobaptism.

4. No Explicit Infant Baptisms in Scripture
Your argument states: "If infant baptism was not acceptable, where is the alternative—children being baptized later in life?" However, this assumes that silence equals approval, which is a logical fallacy.

Every Baptism in Scripture Involves Personal Faith

Acts 8:12 – "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women." (No mention of infants.)

Acts 8:36-37 – "What doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest."
Acts 10:44-48 – Cornelius' household received the Holy Spirit before baptism, proving that faith preceded baptism.

5. The Absence of an "Age of Accountability" Is Irrelevant
The claim that the Bible does not mention an explicit "age of accountability" does not validate infant baptism. Scripture implies an age where people are responsible for their own faith:

Deuteronomy 1:39 – "Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it."

Isaiah 7:16 – "For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings."

These passages suggest children are not held accountable until they reach moral awareness.

6. Baptism Does Not Save (Refuting Baptismal Regeneration)

Romans 6:4 – This passage teaches that baptism symbolizes dying and rising with Christ, but it does not say baptism itself regenerates.

Galatians 3:27 – "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." This does not mean baptism itself saves, but rather faith unites a person to Christ.

Ephesians 2:8-9 – "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man
should boast." Baptism is a work, and salvation is by faith alone.

7. History of Infant Baptism
Your claim that infant baptism was never contested before the Anabaptists is historically inaccurate.

Opposition to Infant Baptism in Early Christianity:
Tertullian (c. 160-230 A.D.) – "Let them come when they are growing up; let them come when they are learning… let them know Christ, then let them be baptized." (On Baptism, ch. 18)

Hippolytus (c. 170-235 A.D.) – Advocated for catechism (instruction) before baptism, which implies cognitive faith before baptism.

Constantine (4th century) – Delayed baptism until deathbed, showing that early Christians did not view baptism as necessary for salvation.

The first clear defense of infant baptism appears in Origen (c. 185-254 A.D.), but even then, it was not universal. Infant baptism became common only after Augustine (4th-5th century), who tied it to original sin.

Conclusion
Scripture teaches that faith precedes baptism, disqualifying infants.

Acts 2:38-39 does not prove infant baptism.

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 is metaphorical, not an argument for paedobaptism.

No explicit infant baptisms are recorded in the New Testament.

The historical record shows infant baptism was debated and not universal.

Baptism does not regenerate but is an act of obedience following faith.

Therefore, your argument for infant baptism is based on misinterpretations of Scripture, historical revisionism, and theological assumptions not supported by the Bible.

Have a good day @synergy.

J.

 

[synergy]

This is error.

Misunderstanding the Audience of Scripture
Your claim that the Bible is written only for those who can read or cognitively listen does not exclude infants from its scope. Rather, Scripture constantly affirms that faith comes through hearing (Romans 10:17), which presumes personal belief and understanding—something that infants are not capable of exercising.

John 20:31 – "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."

Acts 16:31 – "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." (Belief is the requirement for salvation, not ritual baptism alone.)

Mark 16:16 – "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Faith precedes baptism.)

2. Acts 2:38-39 Does Not Teach Infant Baptism
Acts 2:38-39 is commonly misinterpreted to support paedobaptism (infant baptism), but a closer look reveals otherwise:

2:38 "Repent" This is an AORIST ACTIVE IMPERATIVE which means make a decisive decision. The Hebrew term for repentance meant a change of action. The Greek term meant a change of mind (see 2 Cor. 7:8-11). Repentance is a willingness to change. It does not mean a total cessation of sin, but a desire to please God, not self. As fallen humanity we live for ourselves, but as believers we live for God! Repentance and faith are God's requirements for salvation (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16, 19; 20:21). Jesus said "Unless you repent, you will all perish" (cf. Luke. 13:3,5). Repentance is God's will for fallen man (cf. 2 Pet. 3:9, Ezek. 18:23, 30, 32). The mystery of the sovereignty of God and human free will can be clearly demonstrated by repentance as a requirement for salvation. However, the paradox or dialectic pair is that it is also a gift of God (cf. Acts 5:31; 11:18 and 2 Tim. 2:25). There is always a tension in the biblical presentation of God's initiating grace and humanity's needed covenantal response. The new covenant, like the old covenant, has an "if. . .then" structure. There are several terms used in the NT which relate to the concept of repentance.

Acts 2:38-39 – "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call."

Why This Does Not Support Infant Baptism:
Repentance Precedes Baptism – The command to repent is given before baptism. Infants cannot repent, making this passage inapplicable to them.

The "Promise" Refers to Salvation, Not Baptism – The passage does not specify infant baptism, only that salvation is available to all generations whom the Lord calls.

"Children" Does Not Exclusively Mean Infants – The Greek word τέκνα (tekna) simply means "descendants" or "offspring," and does not necessitate infants.

Thus, Acts 2:38-39 does not prove infant baptism. Instead, it reinforces the pattern of repentance preceding baptism.

3. The "Baptism of Moses" in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 Is Not Literal Baptism


"were baptized into Moses" The Greek manuscripts vary between PASSIVE VOICE (i.e., MSS א, A, C, D) and MIDDLE VOICE (i.e., MS B). The UBS4 cannot decide which is original, but puts the PASSIVE in the text. It seems to me the MIDDLE VOICE is contextually appropriate in emphasizing the volitional decision of the Israelites to follow Moses and the historical fact the Jewish proselyte baptism was self administered.

This is an unusual phrase, found only here in the NT. It implies a parallel between the responsibility and privilege of the Mosaic covenant, and the New Covenant in Christ; both are from God and in some ways are similar. Here baptism is used as a symbol for one who follows.

There is a rabbinical tradition going back to Hillel (cf. b Ker 9a; bYeb 46a) which relates proselyte baptism to the Red Sea event. See Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, pp. 102-103.

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 – "Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea."
This passage is metaphorical and does not refer to water baptism as practiced in the New Testament. Key observations:

Israelites "Passed Through" the Sea Without Getting Wet – Unlike New Testament baptism, which involves immersion, the Israelites passed through the Red Sea on dry ground (Exodus 14:22).

No Active Faith Required from Infants – This analogy does not teach baptismal regeneration but rather deliverance through faith in God's power.

Paul's Point is Spiritual Nourishment – The passage emphasizes spiritual sustenance from Christ, not a doctrinal argument for paedobaptism.

4. No Explicit Infant Baptisms in Scripture
Your argument states: "If infant baptism was not acceptable, where is the alternative—children being baptized later in life?" However, this assumes that silence equals approval, which is a logical fallacy.

Every Baptism in Scripture Involves Personal Faith

Acts 8:12 – "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women." (No mention of infants.)

Acts 8:36-37 – "What doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest."
Acts 10:44-48 – Cornelius' household received the Holy Spirit before baptism, proving that faith preceded baptism.

5. The Absence of an "Age of Accountability" Is Irrelevant
The claim that the Bible does not mention an explicit "age of accountability" does not validate infant baptism. Scripture implies an age where people are responsible for their own faith:

Deuteronomy 1:39 – "Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it."

Isaiah 7:16 – "For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings."

These passages suggest children are not held accountable until they reach moral awareness.

6. Baptism Does Not Save (Refuting Baptismal Regeneration)

Romans 6:4 – This passage teaches that baptism symbolizes dying and rising with Christ, but it does not say baptism itself regenerates.

Galatians 3:27 – "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." This does not mean baptism itself saves, but rather faith unites a person to Christ.

Ephesians 2:8-9 – "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man
should boast." Baptism is a work, and salvation is by faith alone.

7. History of Infant Baptism
Your claim that infant baptism was never contested before the Anabaptists is historically inaccurate.

Opposition to Infant Baptism in Early Christianity:
Tertullian (c. 160-230 A.D.) – "Let them come when they are growing up; let them come when they are learning… let them know Christ, then let them be baptized." (On Baptism, ch. 18)

Hippolytus (c. 170-235 A.D.) – Advocated for catechism (instruction) before baptism, which implies cognitive faith before baptism.

Constantine (4th century) – Delayed baptism until deathbed, showing that early Christians did not view baptism as necessary for salvation.

The first clear defense of infant baptism appears in Origen (c. 185-254 A.D.), but even then, it was not universal. Infant baptism became common only after Augustine (4th-5th century), who tied it to original sin.

Conclusion
Scripture teaches that faith precedes baptism, disqualifying infants.

Acts 2:38-39 does not prove infant baptism.

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 is metaphorical, not an argument for paedobaptism.

No explicit infant baptisms are recorded in the New Testament.

The historical record shows infant baptism was debated and not universal.

Baptism does not regenerate but is an act of obedience following faith.

Therefore, your argument for infant baptism is based on misinterpretations of Scripture, historical revisionism, and theological assumptions not supported by the Bible.

Have a good day @synergy.

J.

I'm sorry Johann, but it is obvious to everyone that infants do not have the cognitive ability to read and understand written material let alone the Bible. We need to get over that audience disagreement before I can tackle all your other points. In which case we must consult baptismal verses that explicitly mention or involve infants to get at the truth.

 

[Johann]

I'm sorry Johann, but it is obvious to everyone that infants do not have the cognitive ability to read and understand written material let alone the Bible. We need to get over that disagreement before I can tackle all your other points. In which case we must consult baptismal verses that explicitly mention or involve infants to get at the truth.

Βρέφος (brephos) – "Infant, newborn, baby"
This word is used for unborn, newborn, or very young infants.

Exodus 1:22 (LXX) – πᾶν τὸ βρέφος τῶν Ἑβραίων ("every infant of the Hebrews") – translating יָלוּד (yalud).

Job 3:16 (LXX) – ἢ ὡσεὶ βρέφος ἐκπορευόμενον ἐκ μήτρας ("or like an infant coming forth from the womb").

2. Νήπιος (nēpios) – "Little child, infant, helpless one"
Can refer to a nursing baby or a young child who is not yet speaking or understanding.
Lamentations 4:4 (LXX) – νήπια ᾔτησαν ἄρτον ("the infants asked for bread") – translating עוֹלֵלִים (olelim).
Isaiah 10:19 (LXX) – νήπιος γράψει αὐτούς ("a little child will write them").

3. Παιδίον (paidion) – "Young child, infant"
Often used for small children, sometimes infants.
Exodus 2:6 (LXX) – καὶ ἰδοῦσα αὐτὸ τὸ παιδίον κλαῖον ("and she saw the child crying") – translating נַעַר (na‘ar) in reference to baby Moses.
Isaiah 7:16 (LXX) – πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδίον ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακόν ("before the child knows good or evil").

4. Τέκνον (teknon) – "Child" (broad term)
Used generically for children but sometimes includes infants.
Deuteronomy 29:11 (LXX) – τὰ τέκνα ὑμῶν καὶ αἱ γυναῖκες ὑμῶν ("your children and your wives") – translating טַף (taf).

Give me your verses @synergy.

Johann.

 

[synergy]

Βρέφος (brephos) – "Infant, newborn, baby"
This word is used for unborn, newborn, or very young infants.

Exodus 1:22 (LXX) – πᾶν τὸ βρέφος τῶν Ἑβραίων ("every infant of the Hebrews") – translating יָלוּד (yalud).

Job 3:16 (LXX) – ἢ ὡσεὶ βρέφος ἐκπορευόμενον ἐκ μήτρας ("or like an infant coming forth from the womb").

2. Νήπιος (nēpios) – "Little child, infant, helpless one"
Can refer to a nursing baby or a young child who is not yet speaking or understanding.
Lamentations 4:4 (LXX) – νήπια ᾔτησαν ἄρτον ("the infants asked for bread") – translating עוֹלֵלִים (olelim).
Isaiah 10:19 (LXX) – νήπιος γράψει αὐτούς ("a little child will write them").

3. Παιδίον (paidion) – "Young child, infant"
Often used for small children, sometimes infants.
Exodus 2:6 (LXX) – καὶ ἰδοῦσα αὐτὸ τὸ παιδίον κλαῖον ("and she saw the child crying") – translating נַעַר (na‘ar) in reference to baby Moses.
Isaiah 7:16 (LXX) – πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδίον ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακόν ("before the child knows good or evil").

4. Τέκνον (teknon) – "Child" (broad term)
Used generically for children but sometimes includes infants.
Deuteronomy 29:11 (LXX) – τὰ τέκνα ὑμῶν καὶ αἱ γυναῖκες ὑμῶν ("your children and your wives") – translating טַף (taf).

Give me your verses @synergy.

Johann.

Are you saying that every married couple in Peter's audience (of Acts 2:38-39) was devoid of infants? What's the chances of that?

 

[Johann]

Are you saying that every married couple in Peter's audience (of Acts 2:38-39) was devoid of infants? What's the chances of that?

I am not saying that brother.

J.

 

[Johann]

Thank you for forwarding your understanding of infant baptism. Besides the archeological evidence that does support the Apostolic/Early Church practice of Infant Baptism, the following is also further proof of that Apostolic practice:

Bible Audience
First of all, many people fail to understand who the audience (target group) of the Bible is. The Bible is directed to those who can read or can cognitively listen and that demands a level of cognition that obviously infants do not possess. That's why if you want to learn about infant baptism, you must go to baptismal verses that actually refer to or that actually involve infants such as Acts 2:38-39 and 1 Corinthians 10:1-4.

Acts 2:38-39
“And Peter said to them, ‘Repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself ” (Acts 2:38,39).

That’s the promise of the Holy Spirit for all children under the authority of their parents. That authority held until the child was at least 13 years of age at which point he or she was usually married off and no longer under their parents’ authority.

Baptism of Moses
Moses’ leading his people through the Red Sea is seen as an Old Testament foreshadowing of Christian baptism. The following New Testament passage clearly points to this: “For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them, and that rock was Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) It is worthwhile to note that “all were baptized” through Moses’ leadership in crossing over the Red Sea. He did not leave the infants or children on the shores of Egypt to become prey to the angry armies of Pharaoh because they were not old enough to believe in the promise of the Old Covenant. Rather, entrusted to the arms of their parents’ faith, they were carried through the “baptism of Moses.”

Where is the Alternative to Infant Baptism?
If the baptism of infants was not acceptable during New Testament times, then when does Scripture mention the alternative – the baptism of the children of Christian parents once they have matured out of infancy? The Bible never gives one example of the baptism of a Christian child as an adult. It is important that Scripture also does not speak of an “age of accountability or reason” (which many pinpoint at 13 years) when a child’s capacity to believe the Gospel is developed enough so that he can receive baptism. Neither does the Bible state that every child is in a “suspended state of salvation” until they have reached this age, which one would have to believe if he held to the “age of accountability” theory.

Baptism is not just a metaphor
Baptism is not just a symbolic testimony of what God has done in the heart of an adult believer, but is in itself a dynamic means of actually effecting the power of the Gospel (the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ) in a life (Romans 6:4). Christian baptism is the means whereby we encounter and identify with Jesus Christ Himself. This is one of the reasons why Paul explains baptism as the manner in which we genuinely “put on” or “clothe” ourselves with Christ (Galatians 3:27).

History
There is no evidence that anyone being against infant baptism in the early Church on the grounds that you must first “believe” and be baptized. Tertulian (160 230 A.D.), was the only one who questioned infant baptism. The bulk of his objection, however, was due to his heresy that sin after baptism was unforgivable.
That proves that from Apostolic times all the way to Anabaptist times, there was no issue with infant baptism as a whole. If you want to side with the anti-Apostolic Anabaptists then be my guest.

Infant Baptism is not enough
Of course, Baptism in and of itself is not enough. It must be accompanied by genuine faith. No parents should be allowed to baptize their infant if they themselves have not made an expressed commitment to serve Jesus Christ and raise their child in accordance with God’s Word. As adults, we are called to accept the challenge of our baptism and live dedicated lives for Christ. If we do any less, we have rejected Christ and the gift of salvation He has made available to us since our birth.

I believe this is your source @synergy?

Orthodox Research Institute

The Orthodox Research Institute is a leading source for information, publications and resources related to the Orthodox Church

www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org

J.

 

[synergy]

I am not saying that brother.

J.

Excellent! Therefore, infants are part of Peter's speech in Acts 2:38-39. That associates infants directly with the Promise of the Holy Spirit, and with baptism.

 

[Johann]

Excellent! Therefore, infants are part of Peter's speech in Acts 2:38-39. That associates infants directly with the Promise of the Holy Spirit, and with baptism.

I believe I'm the only person that's not reading this as infant baptism.

Act 2:38 And Peter said to them, Repent, and be immersed each of you in the name of Jesus Christ for a release of sins! and you shall receive the present of the holy spirit.
Act 2:39 For to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all the ones far away, as many as should call on the Lord our God.


Repent ye (metanoēsate). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You crucified this Jesus. Now crown him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first.

And be baptized every one of you (kai baptisthētō hekastos hūmōn). Rather, “And let each one of you be baptized.” Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed “in the name of Jesus Christ” (en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou). In accordance with the command of Jesus in Mat_28:19 (eis to onoma).

No distinction is to be insisted on between eis to onoma and en tōi onomati with baptizō since eis and en are really the same word in origin. In Act_10:48 en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou occurs, but eis to onoma in Act_8:16; Act_19:5. The use of onoma means in the name or with the authority of one as eis onoma prophētou (Mat_10:41) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in Mat_28:19, but this does not show that it was not used.

The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See note on Mat_28:19 for discussion of this point. “Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord” (Page).

Unto the remission of your sins (eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn hūmōn). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of eis does exist as in 1Co_2:7 eis doxan hēmōn (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of eis for aim or purpose. It is seen in Mat_10:41 in three examples eis onoma prophētou, dikaiou, mathētou where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Mat_12:41 about the preaching of Jonah (eis to kērugma Iōna).

They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koiné[28928]š generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.
The gift of the Holy Ghost (tēn dōrean tou hagiou pneumatos). The gift consists (Act_8:17) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).
RWP.


Act_2:39 "the promise is for you and your children" This was an OT corporate, multi-generational, familial concept (cf. Exo_20:5-6 and Deu_5:9-10; Deu_7:9). The faith of the children was affected by the parents and was the parents' responsibility (cf. Deu_4:9; Deu_6:6-7; Deuteronomy 20-25; Deu_11:19; Deu_32:46). This corporate influence also has a frightful aspect in light of Mat_27:25 ("His blood be on us and our children").

The promise of multi-generational faith influence helps me trust that God will use my faith to influence, bless, and protect my descendants (cf. Deu_7:9).

This does not deny personal responsibility, but adds an element of corporate influence. My faith and faithful service in Christ does impact my family and their family and so forth (cf. Deu_7:9). What a comforting hope and motivational promise. Faith runs through families!
In Acts the promise (Act_2:39) of God involves several items with OT links:
1. forgiveness of sins – Act_2:38; Act_3:19; Act_5:31; Act_10:43; Act_13:38-39; Act_26:18
2. salvation – Act_2:21; Act_4:12; Act_11:14; Act_13:26; Act_16:31
3. the Spirit – Act_2:38-39; Act_3:19; Act_5:32; Act_8:15-18; Act_10:44-48; Act_19:6
4. times of refreshing – Act_3:19

"for all who are far off" Peter is addressing Jewish people. This phrase originally referred to exiled Jews who would be brought back to the Promised Land (cf. Isa_57:19). However, it also, in some passages, seemed to refer to the Gentiles who were so far from a knowledge of YHWH (cf. Isa_49:1; Zec_6:15). The good news of the gospel is that the one true God (i.e., monotheism) who created all humans in His image (cf. Gen_1:26-27), desires to have fellowship with all of them (cf. 1Ti_2:4; 2Pe_3:9). This is the hope of the unity of all humans in Christ. In Him there are no more Jews-Gentiles, slaves-free, men-women, but all are one (cf. Eph_2:11 to Eph_3:13). Paul uses this very quote addressing Gentiles in Eph_2:13; Eph_2:17. The new age of the Spirit has brought an unexpected unity!
Utley.

Deuteronomy 1:39 → “Moreover, your little ones, who you said would become prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.”
(This verse supports the idea that infants lack moral knowledge and discernment.)

Isaiah 7:15-16 → “He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be deserted.”

(This suggests that there is an age before which a child does not yet fully grasp moral choices.)

These verses together suggest that infants and very young children lack full moral and cognitive understanding, making them distinct from those who can actively make choices regarding repentance and faith.

But thanks for this discussion brother.

Stay strong in Messiah.

J.

 

[synergy]

I believe I'm the only person that's not reading this as infant baptism.

Act 2:38 And Peter said to them, Repent, and be immersed each of you in the name of Jesus Christ for a release of sins! and you shall receive the present of the holy spirit.
Act 2:39 For to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all the ones far away, as many as should call on the Lord our God.


Repent ye (metanoēsate). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You crucified this Jesus. Now crown him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first.

And be baptized every one of you (kai baptisthētō hekastos hūmōn). Rather, “And let each one of you be baptized.” Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed “in the name of Jesus Christ” (en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou). In accordance with the command of Jesus in Mat_28:19 (eis to onoma).

No distinction is to be insisted on between eis to onoma and en tōi onomati with baptizō since eis and en are really the same word in origin. In Act_10:48 en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou occurs, but eis to onoma in Act_8:16; Act_19:5. The use of onoma means in the name or with the authority of one as eis onoma prophētou (Mat_10:41) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in Mat_28:19, but this does not show that it was not used.

The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See note on Mat_28:19 for discussion of this point. “Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord” (Page).

Unto the remission of your sins (eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn hūmōn). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of eis does exist as in 1Co_2:7 eis doxan hēmōn (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of eis for aim or purpose. It is seen in Mat_10:41 in three examples eis onoma prophētou, dikaiou, mathētou where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Mat_12:41 about the preaching of Jonah (eis to kērugma Iōna).

They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koiné[28928]š generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.
The gift of the Holy Ghost (tēn dōrean tou hagiou pneumatos). The gift consists (Act_8:17) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).
RWP.


Act_2:39 "the promise is for you and your children" This was an OT corporate, multi-generational, familial concept (cf. Exo_20:5-6 and Deu_5:9-10; Deu_7:9). The faith of the children was affected by the parents and was the parents' responsibility (cf. Deu_4:9; Deu_6:6-7; Deuteronomy 20-25; Deu_11:19; Deu_32:46). This corporate influence also has a frightful aspect in light of Mat_27:25 ("His blood be on us and our children").

The promise of multi-generational faith influence helps me trust that God will use my faith to influence, bless, and protect my descendants (cf. Deu_7:9).

This does not deny personal responsibility, but adds an element of corporate influence. My faith and faithful service in Christ does impact my family and their family and so forth (cf. Deu_7:9). What a comforting hope and motivational promise. Faith runs through families!
In Acts the promise (Act_2:39) of God involves several items with OT links:
1. forgiveness of sins – Act_2:38; Act_3:19; Act_5:31; Act_10:43; Act_13:38-39; Act_26:18
2. salvation – Act_2:21; Act_4:12; Act_11:14; Act_13:26; Act_16:31
3. the Spirit – Act_2:38-39; Act_3:19; Act_5:32; Act_8:15-18; Act_10:44-48; Act_19:6
4. times of refreshing – Act_3:19

"for all who are far off" Peter is addressing Jewish people. This phrase originally referred to exiled Jews who would be brought back to the Promised Land (cf. Isa_57:19). However, it also, in some passages, seemed to refer to the Gentiles who were so far from a knowledge of YHWH (cf. Isa_49:1; Zec_6:15). The good news of the gospel is that the one true God (i.e., monotheism) who created all humans in His image (cf. Gen_1:26-27), desires to have fellowship with all of them (cf. 1Ti_2:4; 2Pe_3:9). This is the hope of the unity of all humans in Christ. In Him there are no more Jews-Gentiles, slaves-free, men-women, but all are one (cf. Eph_2:11 to Eph_3:13). Paul uses this very quote addressing Gentiles in Eph_2:13; Eph_2:17. The new age of the Spirit has brought an unexpected unity!
Utley.

Deuteronomy 1:39 → “Moreover, your little ones, who you said would become prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.”
(This verse supports the idea that infants lack moral knowledge and discernment.)

Isaiah 7:15-16 → “He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be deserted.”

(This suggests that there is an age before which a child does not yet fully grasp moral choices.)

These verses together suggest that infants and very young children lack full moral and cognitive understanding, making them distinct from those who can actively make choices regarding repentance and faith.

But thanks for this discussion brother.

Stay strong in Messiah.

J.

Repentance is a requirement for those who have sinned. That is who the "repent" requirement is applied to. There is no denying that.

But does baptism make room for those who have committed no sin and do not need to repent, as is the case for infants?
Has there ever been a baptism that required no repentance? Glad you asked.
The Baptism of Jesus is exactly that, and based on that fact/precedence infants are granted the promise of the Holy Spirit and accommodated into Baptism.

You too, stay strong in the Lord.