Chit-Chat


Reply to topic

Search

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

God's action for us was to send His only begotten Son Jesus, to bear and take away our sins and offer eternal life to all who would believe on Him.

Jesus was baptized as an adult, though He (obviously) :) had no need of salvation and baptism was not "doing" anything for Him. He thereby showed to us that baptism is an outward sign of something inner that has *already* occurred.

Thankfully, it is not through baptism that we are saved, else those who unfortunately cannot be baptized would not be saved. Thankfully too little infants who never hear the Word of God while in their mothers' wombs (including wee infants who are aborted or wee infants who are miscarried), are still safe in the arms of Jesus once their brief earthly life ends.

Frankly....I have never heard teaching such as is being described above from preachers or books. I am very curious where it comes from.

This post was edited on Dec 19, 2017 12:24 PM

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

Scripturally, we do know that the Bible shows an age of innocence. David was assured that though his infant son (with Bathsheba) died, he would one day be with the child again. Jesus took the little children in His arms and *blessed* them. It was not Jesus' wont to bless sinners. (And when He was done blessing them, He did not instruct their mothers to have them baptized.) What is the span of that age? - We do not know. God knows. That is why it is imperative for parents to immerse their children in Scripture.

The unborn Jeremiah and John were called from before birth because they were Old Testament prophets, living and acting in a time when the Lord worked differently than He does in the New Testament age of grace. Now, all who are saved receive the Holy Spirit. Then, even those who were believers and saved by faith in God's coming Messiah did not all have the Holy Spirit. (Thus David prays at one point in the Psalms, Take not thy Spirit from me. We don't need to pray or fear that happening in this New Test. era.) It was imperative for the work God had for Jeremiah and John to do that they be filled with the Spirit from that time. And John? -- the forerunner of THE MESSIAH?! The hope of the ages? *Of course* he would leap in the womb. It's getting close to blasphemy to suggest all babies are in any way similar. :)

We have to understand what we are reading in its context and interpret ("rightly divide" as Paul says*) the Word properly.


*"Rightly divide is a term used in his tentmaking line of work. A big animal hide has to be cut properly to be useful for a tent. So there is a right and wrong way to utilize that animal hide. And there is a right and wrong way to utilize Scripture. Heresies and untruths can be promulgated by wresting Scripture.
Edited: "Orthotomeo" is the Greek word."Tomeo" - to cut. "Ortho" - straight.
We ladies might also understand it by thinking about fabric and quilting, or sewing. If you don't cut your fabric pieces properly, you will simply not be able to sew up the quilt or garment as it should be - even though, to the appearance, there is a big piece of fabric. if it's not handled correctly, it won't produce the desired sewn product.

This post was edited on Dec 19, 2017 10:27 AM

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

Quote from above: "Jesus was baptized as an adult, though He was (obviously) :) already saved and thus had no need of baptism to "do" any work in His life. He thereby showed to us that baptism is an outward sign of something inner that has *already* occurred."
-----------------------------------------------

I very much disagree with this. Jesus was not "already saved." Saved from what? Jesus is the Savior and was not ever among those who needed saving. Jesus was sinless and did not need to be saved from the wrath of God.

"Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him" (Romans 5:9).

There is no need to speculate on the purpose of Jesus' baptism. Jesus told us why He was baptized. It was to "fulfill all righteousness."

Matthew 3:13-15 -- Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him. But John tried to prevent Him, saying, "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?" But Jesus answering said to him, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness."

We are also told why we are baptized: "for the forgiveness of your sins" and to "wash away your sins."

Acts 2:38 -- Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins."

Three days after Saul (Paul) had spoken to the Lord on the road to Damascus he was told:

"Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins" (Acts 22:16).

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

I totally agree with you, MamaAna, and didn't express myself clearly. What I did mean was that baptism does not precede salvation, because clearly, Jesus was baptized, and we know that He didn't "need" to be baptized "in order to" be "saved." So...why did He get baptized? He set us an example that we were to follow baptism is an outward sign of something that has already occurred (and in His case, had no need to "already occur" because He is God and sinless).

Hope that clarifies! :) Thanks for pointing that out.

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

M4J, I am glad that my post didn't come across as too harsh and that you graciously took it as it was meant to be taken.

:)

It is an excellent point that you make that Jesus was baptized as an adult and not as an infant. Another good point you made was that many were coming to Jesus to be baptized, but the children were brought to Jesus so that He could bless them and not for the purpose of baptism (Mark 10:13-16).

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

Jesus was not baptized for the same reason as we are.
Baptism buries us with Christ, it connects us to his saving death.

:)

(Romans 6 verse 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.


And in Colossians we can see baptism cancels our debt. Christ had no debt to cancel, so he got in the filthy baptismal water for another reason, he had no sin he didn't just do this as some silly gesture, he connects with us in our baptismal water where the Bible tells us we then get buried with Christ, our sins were washed off in there, as Colossians tells us it's "by putting off the body of the flesh." Christ had no sin. He didn't get in that water for the same reason that we do.

(Collosians 2 verse 11...
In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands.



The Bible describes what baptism does and it says it buries us with Christ, baptism in some way connects us to Christ, notice how after he was baptized he then was tempted by the evil one and he then began his slow march to the cross, IN his baptism something is happening but not the same thing that happens to us.

Oooooh, No where in the Bible does it say there is an age of accountability just because you can see David's faith about meeting his son again in Heaven, doesn't mean David believed his infant son went to heaven because of his tender age. He believed his son had the gift of saving faith in Christ.

You have to actually study what David believed and it wasn't an age of accountability. That is a recent and New belief that has been developed only in the past several hundred years or so.

(The men in the Old Testament weren't Neanderthals they new the faith very well, maybe even better then we do.


That age of accountability is made up by those who have been taught only in the last several hundred years to reject infant Baptism that the church taught since Christ walked the earth. And with that rejection they began to look at their action or work as some sort of security or proof of faith so even things like baptism turned for them from Gods grace for YOU, to something they have to do obediently which makes it "Law" to be followed.

This leaves us curved in on ourselves and focused on our actions or our good works as some sort of proof of how we are doing, and on good days we fall into sinful pride and on others when things are NOT going so well we question if we truly believe or believe well enough or were sincere enough when we repented or when we were baptized, and then we get baptized again and again, but the scripture says there is one baptism. What I mean is it puts the emphasis on the wrong syllable. We need to focus on Christ and what he did for us,and with that we never question again if our faith is strong enough or sincere enough, because all that matters is that Christ is strong enough and sincere. And all our good works come out of the overflow from our heart. Our good works don't then become a measuring tool for our sincerity or faith.


Now, if your age of accountability where true then there would be two ways to heaven.

ONE being Christ!

T W O! Being Y O U N G! :)

That's two ways!

:)



David's infant son was saved because of his infant faith, David a devout yet sinful man believed in the coming Christ, and did the things devout Jews did. So the baby in the womb would have heard the preaching of God's word, and at 8 days old, if he lived that long would have been circumcised which was his adoption into God's family and God's promises.

In those days in the Old Testament days if the woman converted while pregnant, her child was also known to be converted, so if that child died in the womb, that child too was part of the promise.


David's faith about seeing his son is not proof of an age of accountability it is proof of his faith and raising a child in the faith, even infants. It is proof of God's grace towards the faithful and how God puts no limits by age.

This is good news for you and your children.


One of the problems we have is not recognizing how our Western ways and modern ways impact how we read the Bible, it really matters how the Eastern thinking and thinking of the day impacted what they heard.

They were first hand witnesses and how these events were understood by them, first hand, matters, or at least informs and brings more layers of understanding.

All through the Bible you are dealing with Eastern peoples and Eastern thinking, they lived in packs or tribes, they never ever thought of themselves as individuals


LIKE WE DO TODAY.

or sections of individuals, this is why when we look at Lydia's and the Jailer's family and their servants we know there were multi-generations there including aunts and uncles and their children and their children's children, and also multi-generations of the servant's families.

In groups this large there were children. To think not shows a lack of understanding of how families thought of themselves and lived, and if you assume no children where there for those baptisms you are


READING something INTO the TEXT that IS NOT THERE.

And you are making assumptions based on how you view the world today.


:)

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...


You did not answer my question, Lizbeth (nor reply to the other scriptural issues I raised in my last post):

So ... going by your logic (which is not written in the Bible), babies who do NOT have the luxury of hearing the Word of God in their mothers' wombs (don't have Christian relatives around, are never in church, etc) and die at birth have to go to Hell?

That is the inescapable conclusion of your belief.

David and Bathsheba's baby was not baptized (nor was he circumcised). So why did he go to Heaven, for David to meet later when he died?

Also -- I have gifts for my dc here. Are they theirs if they do not receive them? No.

Christ Jesus died on the cross that man need not perish in Hell. He died there so that "Whosoever will may come" to Him by faith and inherit eternal life.

Those do not come to Him by faith, those who do not receive His free offer of salvation, do not have it.

This is clearly the Word of God. But it sounds like you are saying something very different.

This post was edited on Dec 20, 2017 09:27 AM

re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...


Responding to your last post, liz:

L: In those days in the Old Testament days if the woman converted while pregnant, her child was also known to be converted, so if that child died in the womb, that child too was part of the promise.
-------

Show me in the OT where the Lord says that people converted. were born again. The Old Covenant was COMPLETELY different from the New Covenant, as the book of Hebrews shows.



L: One of the problems we have is not recognizing how our Western ways and modern ways impact how we read the Bible, it really matters how the Eastern thinking and thinking of the day impacted what they heard.
-------

Be very careful with this line of thinking. A lot of professed Christians mix Eastern thinking with Scripture (Catholics started this centuries ago); a new wave of this is going on today, even being taught in Christian colleges and seminaries and churches and "Bible" studies. This is being done in a deceptive, camouflaged way which is leading many believers astray.

The LORD only differentiates between believers and unbelievers, sheep and goats. Geography and time periods mean nothing to Him, only men's hearts, whether or not their faith is in Him and Him alone.




L: All through the Bible you are dealing with Eastern peoples and Eastern thinking, they lived in packs or tribes, they never ever thought of themselves as individuals
-------

GOD dealt with people as individuals from the very beginning, just as He does today. Take, for example, Cain and Abel, Esau and Jacob, Joseph and his brothers -- all the way through the New Testament. Way too many to mention.

IF what you said here is true, then Korah and his followers would not have died in the wilderness when they rebelled against the Word of God which came to them through Moses. The earth would not have opened up and swallowed them up alive, for they were circumcised Jews.



L: In groups this large there were children. To think not shows a lack of understanding of how families thought of themselves and lived, and if you assume no children where there for those baptisms you are
READING something INTO the TEXT that IS NOT THERE.
--------

Dear friend, you are the one who is reading something into the Scriptures which is not there.

Do you think there were NO babies or children in the town mentioned in Acts 8? Is that why you think the Scripture says that "men and women" were saved and baptized?



L: And you are making assumptions based on how you view the world today.
-------

Basing beliefs on the Word of God is not making assumptions. Just the opposite.

This post was edited on Dec 20, 2017 09:48 AM

12345678910...Last

Reply to topic

Search


Return to Chit-Chat