Warning: session_start(): open(/var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80/sess_9t1ks82mgi1ugqmjgm9t0n7smc, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Discussion-Thread/index.php on line 2
Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Discussion-Thread/index.php on line 2 BIBLE DISCUSSION THREAD 229575
We are called by God, Matthew 22:14, Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and the only way to the Father, John 14:6. Anyone can be baptized but he that believeth and is baptized will be saved, Mark 16:16. This is on us, it is our obedience to the Father, we must truly in our heart believe Jesus is the Son of God the Messiah/Christ, and our only hope of salvation, we cannot do that as a baby. It is not a ritual we can check a box on the way to salvation it is between us and God and it must be done in the name of Jesus that we see in the entire New Testament.
When we are baptized in the name of Jesus, what we see in the Bible, we are submerged in water, we die to sin, and are buried in death with Jesus, and when we are raised from the water we are raised into a new life in Christ. We are justified and our journey then begins with sanctification in our walk in the Holy Spirit.
Those who understand the gospel and believe should be baptized.
But to say that infants cannot receive regeneration through grace or be given faith is not something the Scriptures say explicitly yes of no. We do have the example of John the Baptist who leapt in mom's womb when Mary came to visit and John recognized the Savior in Mary's womb.
Another example is David who said that God taught him truth, wisdom and to lean on God while he was in the womb. Ps. 51:5; Ps 71:6 This shows that even though David was sinful even in the womb, David testified that God works grace in a fetus, therefore He can do so in a newborn infant, toddler, or child as He wills. It is reasonable to believe that God does work grace in the heart of infants even when they do not mentally understand, just like He did to those who as adults were dead in their sins and without God.
So, I believe the Scriptural directive to believe the gospel, repent of sin, and be baptized IS specifically for those who can understand their need to turn to God.
But I also believe that God said not to hinder children from coming to Him and that includes baptism for the chlldren of believers who are said by Paul to be holy (saints) already.
I think that Scriptures support both ways to come to baptism. Yet each postition concerning infant baptism comes by inference and not by explicit teaching or excluding infants because the passages concerning believing, repenting are directed at adults.
Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John, has clearly stated that infant baptism was the practice of the church passed down from the apostles.
I know how you feel about this, what I said is a baby cannot believe and accept Jesus as their savior. God in His plan has chosen and placed people in this world to do His will like John the Baptist and many others. God our Father's plan was before anything and as we are, it is June 2024 but to our Father, He is with us today and He is with us when all is made new.
I know you were baptized when you were an infant, can I say that is wrong? No. As one grows one must decide on their own to accept Jesus as their savior regardless of whether they were baptized when they were an infant on the faith of their parents, we must make that choice regardless of our parents.
God knows yesterday, today, and all the time to come, but we are told we must be obedient to our Father just like our Savior Jesus who was obedient unto His death. Salvation and our eternal life with God and our Savior Jesus start with our belief that Jesus is the Son of God who He sent to die for us and pay the price for sin so that we will have eternal life.
It is up to us not our parents. The traditions and doctrines of men will not give us eternal life, only the belief in Jesus the Son of God who God gave that we can be saved.
Amen to you Brother , Acts chapter 8 has been written and preserved by God for our understanding , in particular verse 37 . The traditions of men , however comforting they may seem to us with their smooth words , are to always be rejected but especially when they quite obviously contradict what is written in the Bible . The Bible which is the Word of God .
Thank you, Jesus shamed the leaders of Jerusalem about traditions, Matthew 15:3 and we are told in Colossians 2:8. My understanding is when we believe in our heart that Jesus is the Son of God and the only way to salvation we are justified by God's grace, Romans 3:24 and being baptized is being obedient to God's word, being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: We then start the road to sanctification by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, Titus 3:5.
Jesus Christ has done everything necessary for our salvation and all we do we do in is name including being baptized, Colossians 3:17. He paid the penalty that our sins deserved by His sacrificial death on the cross. His death satisfied God's justice and turned away His wrath from us. God calls us but we must answer we must believe and be obedient to Him to be chosen, Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
When we are baptized in the Name of Jesus we have put on Christ, Galatians 3:27. Being baptized is obedience, Ephesians 2:102 Thessalonians 1:8, every believer who has opportunity will be baptized in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ. Baptism is the result of salvation, not the means to it.
Our obedience strengthens our faith, obedience shows our love for God, and our obedience to God's word is essential and it is not works. Those who are obedient are imitators of Christ and are willingly submitting to the authority, His will, and the word of God.
My husband also was baptized as an infant, but his parents did not live their lives as believers. when we met, I shared Scripture with him and he returned to faith in Christ that He had believed and learned of in Sunday School and Confirmation.
When our children were born we opted not to baptize them in infancy because we were confident that they would choose to baptized at some point in their childhood or teen years. But they did not and still are not baptized nor walking in faith with God.
Now that I am in my 60's and my sons are grown, I have studied this topic of infant baptism over the past 3 decades and I have come full circle back to infant baptism as one valid option because I now understand regeneration better am convinced that Scripture says that the promise of salvation and the privilege of baptism is not only for adults, or parents, but for their children as Peter said in Acts 2:38-39 and understanding the covenant nature of God and His people and His consistent unchanging ways across history as Col.2:10-13 connects circumcision as the sign and seal of being brought into the covenant union of Israelites with God with how baptism does the same thing to believers and their children.
If I had to do it over again with my sons, I would have had them baptized as infants because I now understand how God works in the lives and hearts of the elect even in in utero or infancy and can regenerate His elect at any time He chooses. By faith, I believe He does so in children of believers and therefore, these children are holy and are to be brought into the covenant family by baptism as infants.
You may not agree with me on this, but that is fine with me. I have explained my understanding in the posts to Jones and to you and I stand by them s still, but I welcome to read the biblical reasons anabaptists use to see as valid only believer's baptism.
I must say in response to your reference to my infant baptism, I truly cannot recall a time when I did not believe in Jesus, that He died for my sins, that He forgives me because of His love and sacrifice for me and have always walked by faith. I did not base my salvation on my parents at all. I was regenerated and given the power to believe by the Holy Spirit as early as I can remember. So, my baptism was valid as a witness to the reality of God's work of grace in me before I was baptized as an infant. You may not believe this to be true, but I do because I have walked with our Lord ALL of my life. My regeneration and salvation is not based on my faith or repentance, but wholly on God's grace bestowed on me as a holy child of believing parents, as the passage in 1 Cor. 7:14. It is not difficult for me to believe that God does regenerate fetuses, infants, and children just as He does adults. It is ALL a work of God, not because I have faith or repent. But I believe and repent because God regenerated me to be able to do these things with a heart that has been enlivened and made fit for relationship with Him only by His grace.
I know that people who came to faith as an teen or adult may have a hard time affirming this because their intellects were fully developed when they came to faith. But they, too, were regenerated before they believed, as well. Certainly God is able to do as He pleases in regenerating those elected to salvation at any time during their life-conception to death.
And some who have been raised with an anabaptist theology of baptism and salvation will have difficulty affirming my belief.
As for myself, I was baptized as an infant and raised by believing parents who placed the gospel before me from infancy. When I became an adult, I fellowshipped in pentacostal/charismatic churches that taught believers baptism and though that this made sense as one in my 20's and 30's. cont.
The Anabaptist rejection of infant baptism and insistence of believer's baptism as the only valid baptism is a TRADITION that began in the 1600's in Europe following the Reformation movements of the 1500's. Who are those who believe like the Anabaptists to say that infant baptism is a tradition of men? I could say that about the anabaptist position since it was not held by believers for 1600 years and there are early church leaders such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen who speak of baptizing infants as being normative in the church since the apostles. I would think that these people who were close in time to the apostles and apostolic church teaching and practice would better know what was true of the church in those first centuries than anyone else who lived in the last 400 years. There are two traditions here, the one of 1600 years of practice in the church (infant baptism) and the one of 400 recent years of the anabaptists. If you are going to speak ill of traditions, in all fairness you should recognize that your own anabaptist belief is just as much a tradition as my belief in the validity of infant baptism. Both are inferred from Scripture as to whether or not infants were baptized in the first century church as there is NOT any Scripture that explicitly speaks to this practice pro or against.
I am offended when people play the "tradition" card when speaking of beliefs that date back to the early church as opposed to beliefs that have arisen in recent centuries. Both are traditions or doctrines of the faith and neither is wrong or should be denigrated simply because someone thinks that traditions and doctrines automatically reflect unbiblical teachings.
I do not intend to be quarrelsome with you in this matter but it does bother me when someone uses the "tradition card" to be dismissive about a viewpoint that has long been considered to be orthodox (right belief) views.
That said, I wish to end this conversation with you for the sake of peace.
Question. Can an infant take part in Lord's Supper? It is not possible, is it? When they grow and become children, can they take part? Assuming that they haven't given their heart to Jesus, can they still have Holly Communion? In 1 Corinthians it says that if one participates in Lord's Supper and have unrepentant sins then they are judged. So you see that also practical issues emmerge with baby baptism. It is not the baptism that protects our children. It is our prayers and teachings. As you said the children of the saints are holy. My son was born in the faith, he was actually a present from God to my wife, He attended the church untill he was about 14, he was regenerated and was baptized in the Spirit but not in water. God's grace was surely upon him. And then he made his revolution and abandoned the faith. But I see that he still has brakes in his brains. He knows God and his commandments so he avoids doing sins (not fully but at least not the heavy ones) and stlll prays but he is also attracted to the world. We are prayind for him and we know that God protects him and eventually he will come back. But it is true that God allows people to be taught by life itself like the prodigal son. Some have to end up eating pig's food to wake up and return. So lets keep praying for our children They will definitely come back to the Lord sometime, sooner or later..
I do think that the Lord's Supper is open to all who have a professing faith in Jesus, are old enough to attest to this faith, and who live a life that is turned towards God and his ways. This does not mean that one needs to be sinless in one's life, but one who confesses their sin and seeks forgiveness and hates that they have sinned. This person should partake of the Lord's Supper because it is an "Encapsulated gospel" sign. It is the acceptance and celebration of the New Covenant of the shed blood and broken body of Jesus unto death for our sins. So, those who acknowledge that this is true and for them can partake of the Communion. Those who don't should be excluded.
As to your son's waywardness, like my own sons, I pray for them to return to Jesus in faith as you are praying for your son. I know that God loves our sons and yours more than we ever could and that He is able to work in their lives 24/7 and we cannot.
So, as parents, it is painful when we see our kids turn from the Lord and walk in the ways of the world, especially when they once embraced the Lord as children and teens. In today's church society, this is all too common. I wish the church was more effective in helping children of believers continue to keep the faith as they become adults. Our society is so different than when I grew up in the 60's and 70's when there was much more people of faith surrounding us in our neighborhoods and schools. But even then, many who grew up in church did not continue. I do not know what the answer is to this problematic trend, but I do desire to be persistent in prayer to those I know who have gone wayward like my own sons.
God is so good and knows our sons through ad through. I ask Him to enlighten their hearts again with the gospel and shed His grace upon their souls. I will keep your son in my prayers, too.
Question. Is baptism any good if one does not believe in Jesus? I am living in a country where 95% of all the population have been baptized Greek Ortodox christians. It a custom and a trandition here. I believe in Italy and Spain a huge percentage of people have been baptized as Roman Catholic christians. So what? Is that any good? The prisons here are full of baptized people. People outside swear, steal, murder, rape, etc and they are all baptized when infants. Do they carry on them the grace of God? Has their baptism has done any good to them? I don't think so. They all know a few about Jesus and His life and teachings and that is all.
Can a person be regenerated as an infant? Lets leave it to the scripture to tell us. 1 Peter 2:23, "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." Which is that incorruptible seed that the verse talks about? The answer is given in 1 Peter 24-25, "24 For all flesh is as grass, ...:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." It is the word of God, the gospel, that was preached to us.
In the parable of the Sower and the seed it is the seed that goes inside the good soil(all last 3 cases, never mind that some fall away afterwards). There is no other way. David and John the Baptist were people of the OT, that were never regenerated. Regeneration is not something that we do as people, it is something that God does. When? After we have heard the gospel and have believed and repented and decided to live a new holly life. So God regenerate us so that we become new people, and also become His children, and also through regeneration we are given His grace to obey His commandmenta and change our character in similarity to Jesus. Next step we are baptized, which means that we bury our old self and raise as new people to start a new life. This is how it goes.
I guess we differ on when regeneration happens. I believe one needs to be regenerated (which God does in one by grace alone) in which one is )given the capacity to believe. I believe that without God regenerating a person, that person cannot believe because they are dead in sin and depraved and not inclined to seek Him or obey Him.
As to the people you mentioned. It is true that ma y who have been baptized as infants fall away from their belief in the gospel which they have heard at least in the readings during church services. Just because someone has been baptized does not equate to them being regenerated. They are to separate works, one is what God (regenerate) and the other is what a person chooses (baptism). In churches that baptize infants, children, and adults it is common to speak the gospel over the person before they are baptized because it is the power of God for salvation ( Romans 1:16) and your quote from 1 Peter..
As parents we cannot know of God's work of regeneration in our children, whether they are baptized as infants or as older teens at that time. We will know by fruitful living over time that demonstrate this has occurred in the past. Baptism does not save a person, but it is a sign and a seal that places one into the body of believers. So Christian parents baptize infants and children because they are holy due to the believing faith of their parents and therefore covenantal members of God's people.
We cannot know if one is elect or not. That is God's determination. Churches are full of both those who are elect and those who are not. It can be hard to tell one from another.
And it is true that many who were baptized, whether as infants, children, teens or adults, who stray from faith in Jesus and live lives that are in opposition to God despite being baptized by their parents' choice or their own. This is quite evident. And as long as they are alive, there is still hope that they will come to Jesus in faith. So we pray.
I am offended when someone , anyone , rejects the teachings of God in favour of the teachings of men and then teaches others to do the same . I think we all need to spend more time with our Bibles and less time in the things that pertain to men .
To finish up. There are many things practiced in the Christian church over the centuries, some are ancient and some are recent, that are not delineated in Scripture and most of these are seen as a matter of individual conscience or conviction. So when people disagree on a matter such as these we are to be charitable and not judgmental.
Whether or not to accept infant baptism is one of those matters.
So from my end, I will be charitable to you and not judgmental in things we differ on that are not ESSENTIAL doctrines of the faith.
I hope you will understand where I am coming from in this response to you. God's blessing to you always.
I didn't realize that this reply of yours was to me.
I must say that what offends me is when people comment as you have concerning me in a way that is judgmental when you really do not know me or what God knows in my heart.
I understand that you think we all should seek what the Bible says on matters. I agree with that. However, the Bible nowhere says that if a matter is not explicitly set forth in Scripture we are to reject it as a "tradition of men". There was a whole lot more spoken and preached and practiced by the apostles that are not recorded in Scriptures. But some of these have been spoken about by believers close in time to the apostles and with knowledge of what was practiced. This is where historical information come in to help us to understand matters that are not explained, condemned, or commanded in the Scriptures.
For example, the use of organs, pianos and other instruments were not mentioned in Scripture, but are used in worship services now. Therefore, such use can be considered a new tradition. Is it wrong to practice this tradition since we are not instructed to do this in Scripture? Is it a" tradition of men" that we should reject?
Or, the matter of the Lord's Supper in the church. In the first century it was celebrated with a full meal, but most churches do not include a full meal with this ordinance today. So, is changing the way the Supper is performed and celebrated now a "tradition of men" that we should reject?
How about personal Bible study. In the early church people did not have copies of the Bible to study and that continued for 1500 years or so. Is it a "tradition of men" to engage in personal or even home-group studies and therefore be rejected because it is not commanded in the Scriptures?
Then again, what about children's Sunday School classes. These are a very recent practice in the church and was not commanded or practiced in the early church according to the Scriptures. isn't this a tradition of men?....
You make a lot of great points about what is or what isn't "traditions of men."
I just have to ask, would praying for someone while sitting in the dentist chair getting prepped for a crown be considered a tradition of men?
Sorry, I had to ask and I'm just trying to share a little humor here. There's not much of that anymore and it seems like we can use a little humor every now and then.
May I ask you a personal question ? Of course you do not have to answer and I shan't be offended if you decline . Your own children , were they ' baptized ' as children ? If ' yes ' do you consider them all to be saved because of this infant baptism ? Even your son who converted to islam in order to marry a muslim lady ?
Also Jaz, I do not believe that one s saved by baptism. I believe that the elect will be regenerated by God and enabled to believe, and they will put their faith in Jesus either right away or sometime in their life at the time appointed by God.
If I had them baptized as infants, I would have done so by faith that God had or would regenerate them according to His election (that no one truly knows the eternal will of God) and I would bring them up in the faith as I did when they were not baptized, being sure that they heard the gospel. I believe. whether they were baptized as infants or by their choice, that the gospel presented is the power of God unto salvation. So, God would use the hearing of the gospel message to bring them to faith in Jesus.
Hello Jaz, We did not have our sons baptized as infants. We thought that they would choose to be baptized sometime in their childhood/teen years by their own choice since we were bringing them up in the faith and in a church environment. But they did not choose that as of yet. I continue to pray for them to return to the faith they had in Jesus as children and young teens/
This is the order that I was taught and still believe to be true based on my own study.
Acts 8:36-37 are some of the greatest verses about Baptism. Philip gives the conditions for baptism: That the individual must believe with all their heart that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (this rules out babies being baptized). 1 Pet 3:21 states that it is a figure that is the answer of a good conscience toward God. Based on those two passages, I believe that Belief comes before Baptism.
Now to compare being Born again to Believing, but first, just to define terms, what does being born again mean? It is the same as quickening and regenerating ( Eph 2:1; Tit 3:5). It is a phase of our salvation when God revives us spiritually with His Holy Spirit. We are physically born dead in trespasses and sins ( Eph 2:1-3). When Adam cursed mankind in the garden of Eden he died spiritually that day. God told him he would die the day he ate the fruit ( Gen 2:17), but Adam lived up to 930 years ( Gen 5:5), so either God lied and the Devil was telling the truth ( Gen 3:4) or a different type of death occurred than physical that being spiritual.
Rom 8:7-8 are powerful verses about the state of the carnal mind. Without God's gift of the Holy Spirit we can do nothing that is pleasing to God. Without the Holy Spirit dwelling within us, we only have the old man, the flesh, the carnal mind that hates God without the new man and spiritual mind that wants to please God.
Okay, back to the order of B's... 1 John 2:29 says "every one that doeth righteousness IS born of him" not shall be born of him. If a man does righteousness it is proof that the righteous spirit of God dwells in him and that he was born, quickened, and regenerated to have a spirit that loves God.
Additionally, John 1:12 mentions those who believe on him, but the verse does not end with a period. The rest of the thought is that they WERE born of God ( John 1:13).
We should consider also that when the gospel was being preached by the apostles, there were no second generation children brought up by believing parents at that time. So, the individual baptisms of adults such as the eunuch (who would remain childless) and Saul, (who was single) or Timothy are showing the baptism of those who had not been brought up by regenerated Christian parents. Children of parents who were regenerated were in a different standing than adults who profess faith, repent and are baptized.
The last thing I'd like to point out is that the Scriptures do not have any explicit teaching TO baptize children or infants AND NO teaching NOT to baptize children and infants. Therefore, any stance one would take on infant baptism is by inference.
Just as the Holy Spirit can regenerate adults and give faith to believe in Jesus when they were dead in sin, so can He do the same in infants and children of believing parents who will believe the Gospel as it is taught to them as they grow in intellectual understanding of Jesus, salvation, and their need for sin to be forgiven. We cannot confine God and His grace to one's own way of thinking concerning salvation because the Scriptures clearly say that it is given to us by God alone and not on anything we do. We are chosen from before creation to be saved and He will bring it about. If baptism does not save, but instead is a sign of God doing a saving work in an individual's life, why can't we believe that He can do this in the life of any infant, child, or adult before they have faith to believe? Our faith and repentance comes from God as a gift, and we should believe that He will gift our babies and children with regeneration, faith, and repentance as they are considered holy (saints) by reason of believing parent(s) as soon as they are born. They are just as eligible and deserving of baptism as a sign and seal of the covenant God has promised to the elect no matter their age at baptism.
My thoughts are that since one must be regenerated by the Hoiy Spirit and given faith to believe by him, the order that I would say is regeneration (born again) as a work of God alone comes first as He has elected one to salvation by His will alone. Then comes faith to believe, then baptism as far as believer's baptism goes.
With infant baptism, the person is baptized first with the parents believing on God being a covenant God who is consistent. In the OT circumcision was the sign of entering into a covenant relationship with God. It included both adults, children and infants. In the NT, God is still covenantal with His chosen people, so whole households are to enter into covenant relationship with God.
As is said in 1 Cor. 7:13-14 Paul says that parent(s) are believers, then the children are holy. And Jesus said not to hinder children from coming to Him, including infants ( Mk. 10:14' Lk. 18:16). We are to our children into the household of God in Christ. Baptism is the ordinance that sets one in the covenant relationship with God, therefore we bring infants tinto the church through baptism.
I think one needs to understand that when the Bible speaks of whole households being baptized it is most likely children and infants were included, just as they were in the OT with circumcision (the sign of being in the covenant people of God). Every OT Israelite was not of true faith as Abraham, but they were included within the members of the congregation anyway. Therefore, in like ways, children and infants are baptized, relying upon the promises of God that salvation and forgiveness of sins is for oneself and for one's children, as Peter said in Acts 2:38-39. We also need to realize that when Peter spoke these words, they were addressed to men who had come to Jerusalem for the Pentecost feast, not to women and children. Does this mean that women are not to be baptized into Christ since this statement was addressed to men? NO!
God grants repentance which leads to salvation; and godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to life. There is no way of getting around it; that we must repent and believe; and both true desires come from God. Judas Iscariot had worldly sorrow because it lead to death; He had no understanding of Christ being God in the flesh just having offended an innocent man. He didn't want to seek forgiveness and repent for his sins; his pride wouldn't give him that option apparently.
At this point we have belief; and in order to confess with our mouth and believe in our heart we have to also do a public act of identification and show how we are dying to ourself. Jesus made it clear that if we are ashamed of Him He will be ashamed of us when He comes with His Holy angels ( Luke 9:26; following Luke 9:25 about gaining the world and losing one's soul). I would identify Baptism as being associated with belief and therefore in conjunction with it but immediately after true faith is established. Any church in good standing would ensure a person believes before submitting to the authority of Christ and symbolically being part of the Body of Christ; dead buried and raised with Him.
Believing as the initial step must be more than a mental affirmation of Christ as Lord for even the demons believe and under compulsion everyone on heaven and earth will bow in submission to this fact. To be our Lord and Savior also means a change of who our master is; rather than the god of this world Jesus is our true Master. There are actions therefore that must accompany any true profession of faith; albeit rare circumstances like the thief on the cross who didn't have time to be baptized.
There is no good reason when it can be done to wait; then one has to doubt the sincerity of one's profession.
I would say believing and being born again are pretty much simultaneous; therefore AFTER repentance and remittance from sin with Baptism to follow.
You said you do have an answer for the order, so I will just share my belief.
Ephesians 4:4-6 says "There is ONE BODY, and ONE SPIRIT, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;One Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM,
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and IN YOU ALL.
So, this baptism here speaks of the baptism of the Holyspirit.
We are now joined to Christ by the Baptism of the Holyspirit.
We are part of the body of Christ!
This baptism includes Romans 6:3-4
3)-Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4)- Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Verse 3 speaks of the old man within ourselves dying. (Christ was Judged for our sins)
Verse 4 Speaks of the quickening of the Spirit that rose Christ from the dead and now we are born from above.
The following verses sums this up.
Romans 6:5-11.
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
There is other verses that Parallels this.
So I say once you genuinely believe, you are baptized and born again simultaneously.
Those 3 B's should happen in a particular order. What is that order?
Is it...
You Believe which makes you Born again, and then you can get Baptized?
You get Baptized, you get Born again, and then you Believe?
You Believe, get Baptized, and then you're born again?
etc.
I will say, I do have an answer for the order and why, but I would love to see your stance based on what the New Testament says about these 3 B's.
Praying that Lord be with you all as you draw closer to Him and His Son our risen, reigning, and returning Lord Jesus Christ.
We are called by God, Matthew 22:14, Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and the only way to the Father, John 14:6. Anyone can be baptized but he that believeth and is baptized will be saved, Mark 16:16. This is on us, it is our obedience to the Father, we must truly in our heart believe Jesus is the Son of God the Messiah/Christ, and our only hope of salvation, we cannot do that as a baby. It is not a ritual we can check a box on the way to salvation it is between us and God and it must be done in the name of Jesus that we see in the entire New Testament.
When we are baptized in the name of Jesus, what we see in the Bible, we are submerged in water, we die to sin, and are buried in death with Jesus, and when we are raised from the water we are raised into a new life in Christ. We are justified and our journey then begins with sanctification in our walk in the Holy Spirit.
God bless,
RLW
Those who understand the gospel and believe should be baptized.
But to say that infants cannot receive regeneration through grace or be given faith is not something the Scriptures say explicitly yes of no. We do have the example of John the Baptist who leapt in mom's womb when Mary came to visit and John recognized the Savior in Mary's womb.
Another example is David who said that God taught him truth, wisdom and to lean on God while he was in the womb. Ps. 51:5; Ps 71:6 This shows that even though David was sinful even in the womb, David testified that God works grace in a fetus, therefore He can do so in a newborn infant, toddler, or child as He wills. It is reasonable to believe that God does work grace in the heart of infants even when they do not mentally understand, just like He did to those who as adults were dead in their sins and without God.
So, I believe the Scriptural directive to believe the gospel, repent of sin, and be baptized IS specifically for those who can understand their need to turn to God.
But I also believe that God said not to hinder children from coming to Him and that includes baptism for the chlldren of believers who are said by Paul to be holy (saints) already.
I think that Scriptures support both ways to come to baptism. Yet each postition concerning infant baptism comes by inference and not by explicit teaching or excluding infants because the passages concerning believing, repenting are directed at adults.
Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John, has clearly stated that infant baptism was the practice of the church passed down from the apostles.
I know how you feel about this, what I said is a baby cannot believe and accept Jesus as their savior. God in His plan has chosen and placed people in this world to do His will like John the Baptist and many others. God our Father's plan was before anything and as we are, it is June 2024 but to our Father, He is with us today and He is with us when all is made new.
I know you were baptized when you were an infant, can I say that is wrong? No. As one grows one must decide on their own to accept Jesus as their savior regardless of whether they were baptized when they were an infant on the faith of their parents, we must make that choice regardless of our parents.
God knows yesterday, today, and all the time to come, but we are told we must be obedient to our Father just like our Savior Jesus who was obedient unto His death. Salvation and our eternal life with God and our Savior Jesus start with our belief that Jesus is the Son of God who He sent to die for us and pay the price for sin so that we will have eternal life.
It is up to us not our parents. The traditions and doctrines of men will not give us eternal life, only the belief in Jesus the Son of God who God gave that we can be saved.
In Love God bless,
RLW
Thank you, Jesus shamed the leaders of Jerusalem about traditions, Matthew 15:3 and we are told in Colossians 2:8. My understanding is when we believe in our heart that Jesus is the Son of God and the only way to salvation we are justified by God's grace, Romans 3:24 and being baptized is being obedient to God's word, being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: We then start the road to sanctification by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, Titus 3:5.
Jesus Christ has done everything necessary for our salvation and all we do we do in is name including being baptized, Colossians 3:17. He paid the penalty that our sins deserved by His sacrificial death on the cross. His death satisfied God's justice and turned away His wrath from us. God calls us but we must answer we must believe and be obedient to Him to be chosen, Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
When we are baptized in the Name of Jesus we have put on Christ, Galatians 3:27. Being baptized is obedience, Ephesians 2:10 2 Thessalonians 1:8, every believer who has opportunity will be baptized in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ. Baptism is the result of salvation, not the means to it.
Our obedience strengthens our faith, obedience shows our love for God, and our obedience to God's word is essential and it is not works. Those who are obedient are imitators of Christ and are willingly submitting to the authority, His will, and the word of God.
God bless,
RLW
My husband also was baptized as an infant, but his parents did not live their lives as believers. when we met, I shared Scripture with him and he returned to faith in Christ that He had believed and learned of in Sunday School and Confirmation.
When our children were born we opted not to baptize them in infancy because we were confident that they would choose to baptized at some point in their childhood or teen years. But they did not and still are not baptized nor walking in faith with God.
Now that I am in my 60's and my sons are grown, I have studied this topic of infant baptism over the past 3 decades and I have come full circle back to infant baptism as one valid option because I now understand regeneration better am convinced that Scripture says that the promise of salvation and the privilege of baptism is not only for adults, or parents, but for their children as Peter said in Acts 2:38-39 and understanding the covenant nature of God and His people and His consistent unchanging ways across history as Col.2:10-13 connects circumcision as the sign and seal of being brought into the covenant union of Israelites with God with how baptism does the same thing to believers and their children.
If I had to do it over again with my sons, I would have had them baptized as infants because I now understand how God works in the lives and hearts of the elect even in in utero or infancy and can regenerate His elect at any time He chooses. By faith, I believe He does so in children of believers and therefore, these children are holy and are to be brought into the covenant family by baptism as infants.
You may not agree with me on this, but that is fine with me. I have explained my understanding in the posts to Jones and to you and I stand by them s still, but I welcome to read the biblical reasons anabaptists use to see as valid only believer's baptism.
I understand where you stand too on this.
I must say in response to your reference to my infant baptism, I truly cannot recall a time when I did not believe in Jesus, that He died for my sins, that He forgives me because of His love and sacrifice for me and have always walked by faith. I did not base my salvation on my parents at all. I was regenerated and given the power to believe by the Holy Spirit as early as I can remember. So, my baptism was valid as a witness to the reality of God's work of grace in me before I was baptized as an infant. You may not believe this to be true, but I do because I have walked with our Lord ALL of my life. My regeneration and salvation is not based on my faith or repentance, but wholly on God's grace bestowed on me as a holy child of believing parents, as the passage in 1 Cor. 7:14. It is not difficult for me to believe that God does regenerate fetuses, infants, and children just as He does adults. It is ALL a work of God, not because I have faith or repent. But I believe and repent because God regenerated me to be able to do these things with a heart that has been enlivened and made fit for relationship with Him only by His grace.
I know that people who came to faith as an teen or adult may have a hard time affirming this because their intellects were fully developed when they came to faith. But they, too, were regenerated before they believed, as well. Certainly God is able to do as He pleases in regenerating those elected to salvation at any time during their life-conception to death.
And some who have been raised with an anabaptist theology of baptism and salvation will have difficulty affirming my belief.
As for myself, I was baptized as an infant and raised by believing parents who placed the gospel before me from infancy. When I became an adult, I fellowshipped in pentacostal/charismatic churches that taught believers baptism and though that this made sense as one in my 20's and 30's. cont.
The Anabaptist rejection of infant baptism and insistence of believer's baptism as the only valid baptism is a TRADITION that began in the 1600's in Europe following the Reformation movements of the 1500's. Who are those who believe like the Anabaptists to say that infant baptism is a tradition of men? I could say that about the anabaptist position since it was not held by believers for 1600 years and there are early church leaders such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen who speak of baptizing infants as being normative in the church since the apostles. I would think that these people who were close in time to the apostles and apostolic church teaching and practice would better know what was true of the church in those first centuries than anyone else who lived in the last 400 years. There are two traditions here, the one of 1600 years of practice in the church (infant baptism) and the one of 400 recent years of the anabaptists. If you are going to speak ill of traditions, in all fairness you should recognize that your own anabaptist belief is just as much a tradition as my belief in the validity of infant baptism. Both are inferred from Scripture as to whether or not infants were baptized in the first century church as there is NOT any Scripture that explicitly speaks to this practice pro or against.
I am offended when people play the "tradition" card when speaking of beliefs that date back to the early church as opposed to beliefs that have arisen in recent centuries. Both are traditions or doctrines of the faith and neither is wrong or should be denigrated simply because someone thinks that traditions and doctrines automatically reflect unbiblical teachings.
I do not intend to be quarrelsome with you in this matter but it does bother me when someone uses the "tradition card" to be dismissive about a viewpoint that has long been considered to be orthodox (right belief) views.
That said, I wish to end this conversation with you for the sake of peace.
Question. Can an infant take part in Lord's Supper? It is not possible, is it? When they grow and become children, can they take part? Assuming that they haven't given their heart to Jesus, can they still have Holly Communion? In 1 Corinthians it says that if one participates in Lord's Supper and have unrepentant sins then they are judged. So you see that also practical issues emmerge with baby baptism. It is not the baptism that protects our children. It is our prayers and teachings. As you said the children of the saints are holy. My son was born in the faith, he was actually a present from God to my wife, He attended the church untill he was about 14, he was regenerated and was baptized in the Spirit but not in water. God's grace was surely upon him. And then he made his revolution and abandoned the faith. But I see that he still has brakes in his brains. He knows God and his commandments so he avoids doing sins (not fully but at least not the heavy ones) and stlll prays but he is also attracted to the world. We are prayind for him and we know that God protects him and eventually he will come back. But it is true that God allows people to be taught by life itself like the prodigal son. Some have to end up eating pig's food to wake up and return. So lets keep praying for our children They will definitely come back to the Lord sometime, sooner or later..
Blessings.
I do think that the Lord's Supper is open to all who have a professing faith in Jesus, are old enough to attest to this faith, and who live a life that is turned towards God and his ways. This does not mean that one needs to be sinless in one's life, but one who confesses their sin and seeks forgiveness and hates that they have sinned. This person should partake of the Lord's Supper because it is an "Encapsulated gospel" sign. It is the acceptance and celebration of the New Covenant of the shed blood and broken body of Jesus unto death for our sins. So, those who acknowledge that this is true and for them can partake of the Communion. Those who don't should be excluded.
As to your son's waywardness, like my own sons, I pray for them to return to Jesus in faith as you are praying for your son. I know that God loves our sons and yours more than we ever could and that He is able to work in their lives 24/7 and we cannot.
So, as parents, it is painful when we see our kids turn from the Lord and walk in the ways of the world, especially when they once embraced the Lord as children and teens. In today's church society, this is all too common. I wish the church was more effective in helping children of believers continue to keep the faith as they become adults. Our society is so different than when I grew up in the 60's and 70's when there was much more people of faith surrounding us in our neighborhoods and schools. But even then, many who grew up in church did not continue. I do not know what the answer is to this problematic trend, but I do desire to be persistent in prayer to those I know who have gone wayward like my own sons.
God is so good and knows our sons through ad through. I ask Him to enlighten their hearts again with the gospel and shed His grace upon their souls. I will keep your son in my prayers, too.
Question. Is baptism any good if one does not believe in Jesus? I am living in a country where 95% of all the population have been baptized Greek Ortodox christians. It a custom and a trandition here. I believe in Italy and Spain a huge percentage of people have been baptized as Roman Catholic christians. So what? Is that any good? The prisons here are full of baptized people. People outside swear, steal, murder, rape, etc and they are all baptized when infants. Do they carry on them the grace of God? Has their baptism has done any good to them? I don't think so. They all know a few about Jesus and His life and teachings and that is all.
Can a person be regenerated as an infant? Lets leave it to the scripture to tell us. 1 Peter 2:23, "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." Which is that incorruptible seed that the verse talks about? The answer is given in 1 Peter 24-25, "24 For all flesh is as grass, ...:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." It is the word of God, the gospel, that was preached to us.
In the parable of the Sower and the seed it is the seed that goes inside the good soil(all last 3 cases, never mind that some fall away afterwards). There is no other way. David and John the Baptist were people of the OT, that were never regenerated. Regeneration is not something that we do as people, it is something that God does. When? After we have heard the gospel and have believed and repented and decided to live a new holly life. So God regenerate us so that we become new people, and also become His children, and also through regeneration we are given His grace to obey His commandmenta and change our character in similarity to Jesus. Next step we are baptized, which means that we bury our old self and raise as new people to start a new life. This is how it goes.
I guess we differ on when regeneration happens. I believe one needs to be regenerated (which God does in one by grace alone) in which one is )given the capacity to believe. I believe that without God regenerating a person, that person cannot believe because they are dead in sin and depraved and not inclined to seek Him or obey Him.
As to the people you mentioned. It is true that ma y who have been baptized as infants fall away from their belief in the gospel which they have heard at least in the readings during church services. Just because someone has been baptized does not equate to them being regenerated. They are to separate works, one is what God (regenerate) and the other is what a person chooses (baptism). In churches that baptize infants, children, and adults it is common to speak the gospel over the person before they are baptized because it is the power of God for salvation ( Romans 1:16) and your quote from 1 Peter..
As parents we cannot know of God's work of regeneration in our children, whether they are baptized as infants or as older teens at that time. We will know by fruitful living over time that demonstrate this has occurred in the past. Baptism does not save a person, but it is a sign and a seal that places one into the body of believers. So Christian parents baptize infants and children because they are holy due to the believing faith of their parents and therefore covenantal members of God's people.
We cannot know if one is elect or not. That is God's determination. Churches are full of both those who are elect and those who are not. It can be hard to tell one from another.
And it is true that many who were baptized, whether as infants, children, teens or adults, who stray from faith in Jesus and live lives that are in opposition to God despite being baptized by their parents' choice or their own. This is quite evident. And as long as they are alive, there is still hope that they will come to Jesus in faith. So we pray.
To finish up. There are many things practiced in the Christian church over the centuries, some are ancient and some are recent, that are not delineated in Scripture and most of these are seen as a matter of individual conscience or conviction. So when people disagree on a matter such as these we are to be charitable and not judgmental.
Whether or not to accept infant baptism is one of those matters.
So from my end, I will be charitable to you and not judgmental in things we differ on that are not ESSENTIAL doctrines of the faith.
I hope you will understand where I am coming from in this response to you. God's blessing to you always.
I didn't realize that this reply of yours was to me.
I must say that what offends me is when people comment as you have concerning me in a way that is judgmental when you really do not know me or what God knows in my heart.
I understand that you think we all should seek what the Bible says on matters. I agree with that. However, the Bible nowhere says that if a matter is not explicitly set forth in Scripture we are to reject it as a "tradition of men". There was a whole lot more spoken and preached and practiced by the apostles that are not recorded in Scriptures. But some of these have been spoken about by believers close in time to the apostles and with knowledge of what was practiced. This is where historical information come in to help us to understand matters that are not explained, condemned, or commanded in the Scriptures.
For example, the use of organs, pianos and other instruments were not mentioned in Scripture, but are used in worship services now. Therefore, such use can be considered a new tradition. Is it wrong to practice this tradition since we are not instructed to do this in Scripture? Is it a" tradition of men" that we should reject?
Or, the matter of the Lord's Supper in the church. In the first century it was celebrated with a full meal, but most churches do not include a full meal with this ordinance today. So, is changing the way the Supper is performed and celebrated now a "tradition of men" that we should reject?
How about personal Bible study. In the early church people did not have copies of the Bible to study and that continued for 1500 years or so. Is it a "tradition of men" to engage in personal or even home-group studies and therefore be rejected because it is not commanded in the Scriptures?
Then again, what about children's Sunday School classes. These are a very recent practice in the church and was not commanded or practiced in the early church according to the Scriptures. isn't this a tradition of men?....
You make a lot of great points about what is or what isn't "traditions of men."
I just have to ask, would praying for someone while sitting in the dentist chair getting prepped for a crown be considered a tradition of men?
Sorry, I had to ask and I'm just trying to share a little humor here. There's not much of that anymore and it seems like we can use a little humor every now and then.
Blessings!
If I had them baptized as infants, I would have done so by faith that God had or would regenerate them according to His election (that no one truly knows the eternal will of God) and I would bring them up in the faith as I did when they were not baptized, being sure that they heard the gospel. I believe. whether they were baptized as infants or by their choice, that the gospel presented is the power of God unto salvation. So, God would use the hearing of the gospel message to bring them to faith in Jesus.
This is the order that I was taught and still believe to be true based on my own study.
Acts 8:36-37 are some of the greatest verses about Baptism. Philip gives the conditions for baptism: That the individual must believe with all their heart that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (this rules out babies being baptized). 1 Pet 3:21 states that it is a figure that is the answer of a good conscience toward God. Based on those two passages, I believe that Belief comes before Baptism.
Now to compare being Born again to Believing, but first, just to define terms, what does being born again mean? It is the same as quickening and regenerating ( Eph 2:1; Tit 3:5). It is a phase of our salvation when God revives us spiritually with His Holy Spirit. We are physically born dead in trespasses and sins ( Eph 2:1-3). When Adam cursed mankind in the garden of Eden he died spiritually that day. God told him he would die the day he ate the fruit ( Gen 2:17), but Adam lived up to 930 years ( Gen 5:5), so either God lied and the Devil was telling the truth ( Gen 3:4) or a different type of death occurred than physical that being spiritual.
Rom 8:7-8 are powerful verses about the state of the carnal mind. Without God's gift of the Holy Spirit we can do nothing that is pleasing to God. Without the Holy Spirit dwelling within us, we only have the old man, the flesh, the carnal mind that hates God without the new man and spiritual mind that wants to please God.
Okay, back to the order of B's... 1 John 2:29 says "every one that doeth righteousness IS born of him" not shall be born of him. If a man does righteousness it is proof that the righteous spirit of God dwells in him and that he was born, quickened, and regenerated to have a spirit that loves God.
Additionally, John 1:12 mentions those who believe on him, but the verse does not end with a period. The rest of the thought is that they WERE born of God ( John 1:13).
Born again, Believe, Baptism.
cont. Pt. 2.
We should consider also that when the gospel was being preached by the apostles, there were no second generation children brought up by believing parents at that time. So, the individual baptisms of adults such as the eunuch (who would remain childless) and Saul, (who was single) or Timothy are showing the baptism of those who had not been brought up by regenerated Christian parents. Children of parents who were regenerated were in a different standing than adults who profess faith, repent and are baptized.
The last thing I'd like to point out is that the Scriptures do not have any explicit teaching TO baptize children or infants AND NO teaching NOT to baptize children and infants. Therefore, any stance one would take on infant baptism is by inference.
Just as the Holy Spirit can regenerate adults and give faith to believe in Jesus when they were dead in sin, so can He do the same in infants and children of believing parents who will believe the Gospel as it is taught to them as they grow in intellectual understanding of Jesus, salvation, and their need for sin to be forgiven. We cannot confine God and His grace to one's own way of thinking concerning salvation because the Scriptures clearly say that it is given to us by God alone and not on anything we do. We are chosen from before creation to be saved and He will bring it about. If baptism does not save, but instead is a sign of God doing a saving work in an individual's life, why can't we believe that He can do this in the life of any infant, child, or adult before they have faith to believe? Our faith and repentance comes from God as a gift, and we should believe that He will gift our babies and children with regeneration, faith, and repentance as they are considered holy (saints) by reason of believing parent(s) as soon as they are born. They are just as eligible and deserving of baptism as a sign and seal of the covenant God has promised to the elect no matter their age at baptism.
Good question.
My thoughts are that since one must be regenerated by the Hoiy Spirit and given faith to believe by him, the order that I would say is regeneration (born again) as a work of God alone comes first as He has elected one to salvation by His will alone. Then comes faith to believe, then baptism as far as believer's baptism goes.
With infant baptism, the person is baptized first with the parents believing on God being a covenant God who is consistent. In the OT circumcision was the sign of entering into a covenant relationship with God. It included both adults, children and infants. In the NT, God is still covenantal with His chosen people, so whole households are to enter into covenant relationship with God.
As is said in 1 Cor. 7:13-14 Paul says that parent(s) are believers, then the children are holy. And Jesus said not to hinder children from coming to Him, including infants ( Mk. 10:14' Lk. 18:16). We are to our children into the household of God in Christ. Baptism is the ordinance that sets one in the covenant relationship with God, therefore we bring infants tinto the church through baptism.
I think one needs to understand that when the Bible speaks of whole households being baptized it is most likely children and infants were included, just as they were in the OT with circumcision (the sign of being in the covenant people of God). Every OT Israelite was not of true faith as Abraham, but they were included within the members of the congregation anyway. Therefore, in like ways, children and infants are baptized, relying upon the promises of God that salvation and forgiveness of sins is for oneself and for one's children, as Peter said in Acts 2:38-39. We also need to realize that when Peter spoke these words, they were addressed to men who had come to Jerusalem for the Pentecost feast, not to women and children. Does this mean that women are not to be baptized into Christ since this statement was addressed to men? NO!
cont.
At this point we have belief; and in order to confess with our mouth and believe in our heart we have to also do a public act of identification and show how we are dying to ourself. Jesus made it clear that if we are ashamed of Him He will be ashamed of us when He comes with His Holy angels ( Luke 9:26; following Luke 9:25 about gaining the world and losing one's soul). I would identify Baptism as being associated with belief and therefore in conjunction with it but immediately after true faith is established. Any church in good standing would ensure a person believes before submitting to the authority of Christ and symbolically being part of the Body of Christ; dead buried and raised with Him.
Believing as the initial step must be more than a mental affirmation of Christ as Lord for even the demons believe and under compulsion everyone on heaven and earth will bow in submission to this fact. To be our Lord and Savior also means a change of who our master is; rather than the god of this world Jesus is our true Master. There are actions therefore that must accompany any true profession of faith; albeit rare circumstances like the thief on the cross who didn't have time to be baptized.
There is no good reason when it can be done to wait; then one has to doubt the sincerity of one's profession.
I would say believing and being born again are pretty much simultaneous; therefore AFTER repentance and remittance from sin with Baptism to follow.
You said you do have an answer for the order, so I will just share my belief.
Ephesians 4:4-6 says "There is ONE BODY, and ONE SPIRIT, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;One Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM,
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and IN YOU ALL.
So, this baptism here speaks of the baptism of the Holyspirit.
We are now joined to Christ by the Baptism of the Holyspirit.
We are part of the body of Christ!
This baptism includes Romans 6:3-4
3)-Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4)- Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Verse 3 speaks of the old man within ourselves dying. (Christ was Judged for our sins)
Verse 4 Speaks of the quickening of the Spirit that rose Christ from the dead and now we are born from above.
The following verses sums this up.
Romans 6:5-11.
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
There is other verses that Parallels this.
So I say once you genuinely believe, you are baptized and born again simultaneously.
You are now justified in the eyes of the Lord.
Thanks and God bless.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?