Is it possible to lose salvation?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
16,509
4,788
113
71
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
I pointed you to Colossians 2:11-12, where Paul is very clear that in the early church, baptism had replaced circumcision as the sign and seal of the covenant.
While it could imply baptism replaces ccircumcision, it is only an implication. And that says nothing about babies being baptized.
Nope. Hey, I have a son and daughter, and although they are no longer infants, they were a part of my household at their respective births. So, no, that was never true... never did households only consist of adults (considered or otherwise). 'All' meant all then, and it still does.
Now you are forcing a 21st century mindset to the first century reality. That is revisionist history rewriting.
Well, it was about the promise of God, and baptism (formerly circumcision, as I said above) is the sign and seal of the covenant. And that was true in the first century, as Peter's sermon was in about ~ give or take a few years, 40 A.D.. So, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins... the promise is for you and for your children." You can't get away from this, Ronald. You can't.
Pray tell what covenant is batpism a sign of and can you show scripture where it says so? Circumcision is specifically shown as a sign of a covenant, but baptism isn't.
There is no correlation between the "mitzvahs"... <smile> and baptism. At the very least, that has to be true because Jewish households still circumcise, and that occurs... in infancy, to this day; the ceremony is called brit milah and is the covenant circumcision, and as such is the one-to-one correlation with Christian baptism... it is the sign of the Jewish people’s covnant with God.
I never said there was. I merely shown the historic fact that in Jewish households a [person was considered a member of the household at their bar/bat mitzvah.

Galatians 4

King James Version

4 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.

You can think what you wish, but you cannot alter the facts.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
16,509
4,788
113
71
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Though Paul does not teach that water baptism is a JUSTIFICATION requirement I think baptizing a child is a wonderful way of bringing glory to GOD :)
Well what we think is only well if it coincides with Scripture. But the testimony of Scripture is people being baptized who know what they are doing! that does not include children. We also have no direct evidence of infants being baptized. so how does this glorify god?
 

Christian Soldier

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2024
1,474
278
83
37
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Though Paul does not teach that water baptism is a JUSTIFICATION requirement I think baptizing a child is a wonderful way of bringing glory to GOD :)
A baby or child are not mature enough to understand what baptism is. How would baptising a reprobate baby bring glory to God. Salvation is of the Lord, He alone choses who is saved and who is left dead in their sin.
All of those whom God elected for salvation, before He created the earth, will be drawn to God and they will eventually seek to be baptised.

God does not outsource salvation, to any religious organisation, or the parents. How can any man know, that God elected to predestine a baby onto salvation???? answer, nobody apart from God knows, so infant baptism is a futile exercise
 

shepherdsword

Encounter Team - Eagle
Staff member
Encounter Team
Feb 12, 2009
2,034
1,632
113
Millington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male

PinSeeker

Well-Known Member
Oct 4, 2021
4,273
1,029
113
Nashville
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
While it could imply baptism replaces ccircumcision...
It does. Circumcision used to be, in the days of the Israelites, and baptism is, since Jesus's first coming, the sign and seal of the covenant. Which is not to be denied anyone for any reason, and given to all children, even infants of believers.

it is only an implication.
Fair enough, at least you admit to the implication. But it is explicit.

And that says nothing about babies being baptized.
It does, because baptism is, like circumcision used to be, the sign and seal of the covenant. And circumcision, by commandment of God, was to be administered at the age of eight days. Not eight years, Ronald, but eight days.

Now you are forcing a 21st century mindset to the first century reality. That is revisionist history rewriting.
Pish.

Pray tell what covenant is batpism a sign of and can you show scripture where it says so? Circumcision is specifically shown as a sign of a covenant, but baptism isn't.
Circumcision:
  • "And God said to Abraham, 'As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised'" (Genesis 17:9-10)
  • "And (God) gave him the covenant of circumcision. And so Abraham became the father of Isaac, and circumcised him on the eighth day, and Isaac became the father of Jacob, and Jacob of the twelve patriarchs" (Acts 7:8).

Baptism:
  • "And Peter said to them, 'Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to Himself'” (Acts 2:38-39)
  • "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, having been buried with Him in baptism..." (Colossians 2:11-12).

I merely shown the historic fact that in Jewish households a [person was considered a member of the household at their bar/bat mitzvah.
It's not a historic fact at all; they were considered adults then, not mere members of the household. In addtion, as I said, the direct correlation is not between bar/bat mitzvah and baptism, but between brit milah (circumcision, which is still performed in Jewish households on infants and baptism.

You can think what you wish...
Sure. Same to you.

...but you cannot alter the facts.
Never would I do that. Nor state something as fact when it is obviously not.

Grace and peace to you, Ronald.
 

PinSeeker

Well-Known Member
Oct 4, 2021
4,273
1,029
113
Nashville
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
A baby or child are not mature enough to understand what baptism is.
Absolutely irrelevant. No one is to be denied access to the covenant/promise of God for any reason, even age or comprehension of signficance.

How would baptising a reprobate baby bring glory to God.
And how would denying God's promise to anyone, even a baby, glorify God. And... how would doing so even... well, do something very different than glorify God?

Salvation is of the Lord, He alone choses who is saved and who is left dead in their sin.
Well, right, of course, but we're not talking immediately about salvation. Water baptism does not save, nor should it be relegated to a sign of belief. It is God's covenant sign, a sign of the promise He has made, and... again, it is to be denied no one for any reason, even age or of any certain comprehensive ability. It is for all.

All of those whom God elected for salvation, before He created the earth, will be drawn to God...
Yes, exactly.

and they will eventually seek to be baptised.
Well, yes, if they have not been baptized before; there is no need to be "re-baptized," as if their water baptism did not "take" or was not good enough. <smile> But if they were baptized as infants, they have received God's outward sign of His covenant/promise.

God does not outsource salvation, to any religious organisation, or the parents. How can any man know, that God elected to predestine a baby onto salvation???? answer, nobody apart from God knows...
<chuckles> Right. Agreed. But not directly relevant to the specific topic regarding water baptism.

...so infant baptism is a futile exercise
Far, far from it. Now, the baby may or may not be called by the Lord at any point during his or her life, and if not, that is because, yes, he or she is not elect of God. But we cannot know that. In any case, they should not be denied access to God's promise of salvation for any reason... at any age, or dependent on cognitive ability, or for any reason.

Grace and peace to you.
 

rvmb

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2025
1,252
330
83
Adelaide
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
A baby or child are not mature enough to understand what baptism is. How would baptising a reprobate baby bring glory to God. Salvation is of the Lord, He alone choses who is saved and who is left dead in their sin.
All of those whom God elected for salvation, before He created the earth, will be drawn to God and they will eventually seek to be baptised.

God does not outsource salvation, to any religious organisation, or the parents. How can any man know, that God elected to predestine a baby onto salvation???? answer, nobody apart from God knows, so infant baptism is a futile exercise
 

rvmb

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2025
1,252
330
83
Adelaide
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
""A baby or child are not mature enough to understand what baptism is.""
100% correct.
""How would baptising a reprobate baby bring glory to God""
The same way that any public demonstration of faith in Christ does.
 

rvmb

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2025
1,252
330
83
Adelaide
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Well what we think is only well if it coincides with Scripture. But the testimony of Scripture is people being baptized who know what they are doing! that does not include children. We also have no direct evidence of infants being baptized. so how does this glorify god?
Where did I claim/state/imply that INFANT BAPTISM is a salvation requirement ?
""so how does this glorify god?""
The same way that any public demonstration of faith shows a belief in Christ :)
 

Christian Soldier

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2024
1,474
278
83
37
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I agree

Hmmm what is a "reprobate baby"? How can an infant possibly be reprobate?
I know it sounds harsh to claim that babies are born "reprobate", but this is not based on my opinion.
It's as a consequence of original sin (all people being born as sinners), God sovereignly decides before creation whom He will save (the elect) and whom He will pass over, leaving them to their just condemnation for their sins (the reprobate).

Reprobation is the flip side of God's choosing (election) some for salvation; if some are chosen, others are not, and this non-choice is itself a divine decree.

In Romans 9 Paul's analogy of the potter (God) making vessels of mercy (the elect) and vessels of wrath (the reprobate) to show His power and justice.

In John 6:37 Christ notes the Father gives some to Him, implying others are not given.

Matt 20:15 ‘Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?’

Romans 11:33-36 ‘O depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his counsellor? or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and unto him are all things. To him be the glory for ever. Amen.’

I don't believe anyone should question anything God does, I believe it's very dangerous and it has eternal consciences.

Romans 9:13"As it is written, 'Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.'"
Paul uses this quote to explain God's choosing of Jacob and rejecting of Esau as an example of God's sovereign choice, not based on works but on His own purpose. This was written before the they were born.
 

Christian Soldier

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2024
1,474
278
83
37
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Absolutely irrelevant. No one is to be denied access to the covenant/promise of God for any reason, even age or comprehension of signficance.


And how would denying God's promise to anyone, even a baby, glorify God. And... how would doing so even... well, do something very different than glorify God?


Well, right, of course, but we're not talking immediately about salvation. Water baptism does not save, nor should it be relegated to a sign of belief. It is God's covenant sign, a sign of the promise He has made, and... again, it is to be denied no one for any reason, even age or of any certain comprehensive ability. It is for all.


Yes, exactly.


Well, yes, if they have not been baptized before; there is no need to be "re-baptized," as if their water baptism did not "take" or was not good enough. <smile> But if they were baptized as infants, they have received God's outward sign of His covenant/promise.


<chuckles> Right. Agreed. But not directly relevant to the specific topic regarding water baptism.


Far, far from it. Now, the baby may or may not be called by the Lord at any point during his or her life, and if not, that is because, yes, he or she is not elect of God. But we cannot know that. In any case, they should not be denied access to God's promise of salvation for any reason... at any age, or dependent on cognitive ability, or for any reason.

Grace and peace to you.
It doesn't make any sense, to suggest that it's possible to deny access to the covenant/promise of God. If it were possible then Gods election would be dependant on man. But thank God, nothing can thwart His decree's or prevail against His sovereign will.

God has predetermined the whole of human history, from the begging of time to the end of time. He has predestined every singe one of His elect to salvation, before time began. He wrote each individuals name in His book of life, before He created the heavens and the earth. And no more names can ever be added to His original book, likewise, no names can ever be removed from His book of life.

So there's nothing to worry about, God has every singe thing under full control and nothing can happen apart from His sovereign will. It's actually sinful to worry, it demonstrates a lack of faith in the Lord.

As I have already mentioned earlier, every single one of Gods elect will come forth seeking to be baptised. This will happen at Gods appointed time, and no man can do anything to stop Gods will.
In any case, a proper Church Minister will not baptize anyone until the applicant meets all the requirements. I had to make big changes in my life, before I met my Minister's requirements for baptism and Church membership.

A baby or infant can't meet any of the requirements, so they are automatically excluded.
 

Christian Soldier

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2024
1,474
278
83
37
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
""A baby or child are not mature enough to understand what baptism is.""
100% correct.
""How would baptising a reprobate baby bring glory to God""
The same way that any public demonstration of faith in Christ does.
That's true if you believe that "lip service" brings glory to God. But we know God is not pleased with outward religion, He looks at the heart.
The religious folks are as white washed tombs, they are clean on the outside, but inwardly they are stinking rotting corpses.
 

GRACE ambassador

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2021
2,819
2,029
113
73
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
""A baby or child are not mature enough to understand what baptism is.""
100% correct.
""How would baptising a reprobate baby bring glory to God""
The same way that any public demonstration of faith in Christ does.
Precious friend, @rvmb, how about all the denominational Confusion (of multiple Divisions
of
) traditions of water baptisms, When God Teaches, Under Grace, There Is Only:

For Today? God Is Certainly Not The Author (1 Co 14:33 AV) Of All of that
Dishonoring Confusion, Correct?

Amen.
 

rvmb

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2025
1,252
330
83
Adelaide
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Precious friend, @rvmb, how about all the denominational Confusion (of multiple Divisions
of
) traditions of water baptisms, When God Teaches, Under Grace, There Is Only:

For Today? God Is Certainly Not The Author (1 Co 14:33 AV) Of All of that
Dishonoring Confusion, Correct?

Amen.
Hey GA, yourself, Alex Kurz, Richard Jordan, David Reid, David Osteen do the type of teaching that makes sense :)
I maybe wrong but I think the unrequired baby baptism tradition is one of many ways that believers can lead unbelievers to the knowledge of Christ.
eg An unbeliever gets dragged to church by their friends for the baby baptism then something in the message turns them to Christ >>> Glory to GOD :)
 

PinSeeker

Well-Known Member
Oct 4, 2021
4,273
1,029
113
Nashville
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
It doesn't make any sense, to suggest that it's possible to deny access to the covenant/promise of God.
Well, it does; it seems to me you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. And I think the larger issue is one's understanding of what water baptism is and why we administer it. Certainly we are to do so; none of us are in disagreement about that.

If it were possible then Gods election would be dependent on man. But thank God, nothing can thwart His decree's or prevail against His sovereign will.

God has predetermined the whole of human history, from the begging of time to the end of time. He has predestined every singe one of His elect to salvation, before time began. He wrote each individuals name in His book of life, before He created the heavens and the earth. And no more names can ever be added to His original book, likewise, no names can ever be removed from His book of life.

So there's nothing to worry about, God has every singe thing under full control and nothing can happen apart from His sovereign will. It's actually sinful to worry, it demonstrates a lack of faith in the Lord.

As I have already mentioned earlier, every single one of Gods elect will come forth seeking to be baptised. This will happen at Gods appointed time, and no man can do anything to stop Gods will.
Right, I totally agree, but, yeah, I think you're misunderstanding me.

In any case, a proper Church Minister will not baptize anyone until the applicant meets all the requirements.
Ah, so, having placed those "requirements" on one's eligibility for baptism, he would in that case be denying the "applicant" access to the covenant promises of God. <smile> Probably a more understandable way to put that is that he would place prerequisites of his own (and maybe the parents') on one's eligibility to receive the outward sign of God's covenant. So... I disagree with your statement here. As you know, I'm sure, Jesus did say, after all, "Let the little children come to me..." There were no prerequisites attached to that ~ with regard to age, comprehension/understanding, or ability to do this or that. Not even faith, actually.

I had to make big changes in my life, before I met my Minister's requirements for baptism and Church membership.
Hmmm, okay. Who is your minister to put any requirements on water baptism if there are none (which, there are not)? But... all's well that ends well; no, um, condemnation or anything like that towards your minister, of course. Interesting that you... well, "lump together, " I guess, baptism and church membership. You can call this my opinion if you like, but these are two are different things. So... (read next comment)...

A baby or infant can't meet any of the requirements...
There are none. Church membership (and eligibility to participate with the rest of the church membership in communion), yes, but baptism no.

...so they are automatically excluded.
Disagree.

Very interesting that you lead this post off by saying it is not "possible to deny access to the covenant/promise of God," but you end up saying "a baby or infant can't meet any of the requirements so they are automatically excluded." In which case you are contradicting yourself, really, even though you certainly don't mean to be doing so. I get it, though: you're first statement is in a different context than the last, you see? So:
  • ...if you put the first in the same larger context as the last, then, yes, it is possible to deny access to the covenant/promise of God.
  • ...alternatively, if you put the last comment in the same larger context as the first, then, since there are no requirements God places on one's eligibility for this outward sign of God's covenant, and then if follows that even babies are not excluded.
You see?

Grace and peace to you, CS.
 
Last edited:

Christian Soldier

Well-Known Member
Jun 30, 2024
1,474
278
83
37
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Well, it does; it seems to me you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. And I think the larger issue is one's understanding of what water baptism is and why we administer it. Certainly we are to do so; none of us are in disagreement about that.


Right, I totally agree, but, yeah, I think you're misunderstanding me.


Ah, so, having placed those "requirements" on one's eligibility for baptism, he would in that case be denying the "applicant" access to the covenant promises of God. <smile> Probably a more understandable way to put that is that he would place prerequisites of his own (and maybe the parents') on one's eligibility to receive the outward sign of God's covenant. So... I disagree with your statement here. As you know, I'm sure, Jesus did say, after all, "Let the little children come to me..." There were no prerequisites attached to that ~ with regard to age, comprehension/understanding, or ability to do this or that. Not even faith, actually.


Hmmm, okay. Who is your minister to put any requirements on water baptism if there are none (which, there are not)? But... all's well that ends well; no, um, condemnation or anything like that towards your minister, of course. Interesting that you... well, "lump together, " I guess, baptism and church membership. You can call this my opinion if you like, but these are two are different things. So... (read next comment)...


There are none. Church membership (and eligibility to participate with the rest of the church membership in communion), yes, but baptism no.


Disagree.

Very interesting that you lead this post off by saying it is not "possible to deny access to the covenant/promise of God," but you end up saying "a baby or infant can't meet any of the requirements so they are automatically excluded." In which case you are contradicting yourself, really, even though you certainly don't mean to be doing so. I get it, though: you're first statement is in a different context than the last, you see? So:
  • ...if you put the first in the same larger context as the last, then, yes, it is possible to deny access to the covenant/promise of God.
  • ...alternatively, if you put the last comment in the same larger context as the first, then, since there are no requirements God places on one's eligibility for this outward sign of God's covenant, and then if follows that even babies are not excluded.
You see?

Grace and peace to you, CS.
I think you missed the point I was trying to make in the first part of my reply. I was actually trying to say that man cannot deny what God has predestined by His sovereign will. Man can do nothing to stop anything that God has predestined to take place.

We know that God never predestined any infant or baby to be baptised, because baptism is only for those who are mature enough to understand what it is and they must apply for it, then the Minister must be convinced that the applicant meets all the requirements set out by God Himself.

The following are the primary requirement for baptism; According to the Bible (Gods Word), not mine.

The applicant must make a credible, public profession of personal faith in Jesus Christ, demonstrating a genuine change of heart (repentance and regeneration) and a union with Christ, making the candidate a "believer's baptism" subject, not an infant. It's an ordinance (not a sacrament) symbolizing the believer's death to sin and resurrection in new life, making it a prerequisite for church membership and the Lord's Supper, with immersion being the preferred mode to depict Christ's death and resurrection.

Key Requirements for Baptism:

  1. Regeneration & Faith: The person must have experienced regeneration by the Holy Spirit, leading to a genuine, conscious faith in Christ as Savior and Lord.
  2. Repentance: A turning away from sin and toward God is essential, demonstrated by a confession and a transformed life.
  3. Public Profession: A verifiable, public declaration of this faith and repentance is required, often in a church setting.
  4. Union with Christ: Baptism signifies the believer's spiritual identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3-
  5. Believers Baptism: Only those who have consciously professed faith are to be baptized (credobaptism), rejecting infant baptism (paedobaptism).
What it Signifies
  • An Ordinance, Not a Sacrament: It's a command from Christ (Matthew 28:19) and a picture of grace, not a means of conferring grace itself.
  • Covenantal: It's seen as the New Covenant sign for believers, contrasting with Old Covenant circumcision.
  • Immersion: The Greek word baptizo (dip/immerse) and the symbolism of dying/rising with Christ make immersion the appropriate method.
  • Prerequisite: It's a necessary step for formal church membership and participation in the Lord's Supper.
 

PinSeeker

Well-Known Member
Oct 4, 2021
4,273
1,029
113
Nashville
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
I think you missed the point I was trying to make in the first part of my reply. I was actually trying to say that man cannot deny what God has predestined by His sovereign will.
Which I got... and thought I enunciated that. I agreed with what you said, but that was beside the point.

Man can do nothing to stop anything that God has predestined to take place.
Right; previously agreed...

We know that God never predestined any infant or baby to be baptised...
Well, agreed, but that's really neither here nor there. Although... God did ordain every day of our lives before there was yet any one of them, as David says of himself in Psalm 139... But let's bypass this, as it's not relevant to what we're talking about here, or at least shouldn't be...

...because baptism is only for those who are mature enough to understand what it is and they must apply for it...
Right... Disagree, and disagree. <smile> Neither is the case. The water baptism we administer is the outward sign of God's covenant to be the God of us and our children ~ like circumcision was in Old Testament times from the time of Abraham forward, which was performed on eight-day-old infants ~ so a sacrament in that way. And I'll say again that it is the outward sign of God's covenant, not the covenant itself, of course, and should not be... you know the better word to use here rather than 'denied' is 'withheld'... so should not be withheld from anyone in the covenant community for any reason.

, then the Minister must be convinced that the applicant meets all the requirements set out by God Himself.
Ah, so the minister thinks he is divinely inspired in the same manner as, say, Isaiah, and Amos, and Paul and Peter were in writing the parts of the Bible they wrote? <smile> Sorry, that's rhetorical; no answer needed... <smile>

The following are the primary requirement for baptism; According to the Bible (Gods Word), not mine.
That's very debatable... <smile>

The applicant must make a credible, public profession of personal faith in Jesus Christ, demonstrating a genuine change of heart (repentance and regeneration) and a union with Christ, making the candidate a "believer's baptism" subject, not an infant.
Disagree. <smile> Easy to say, but not so easy to back up with Scripture, which, of course, is God's Word. You might point to what Paul says in Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 to back this up, but... Well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, so you can speak to this if you want.

It's an ordinance (not a sacrament) symbolizing the believer's death to sin and resurrection in new life...
Ah, no, it is a sacrament ~ it is a visible reminder of God's promise to be the God of those whom He calls. And in the case of infants, the parents are calling in faith on God's promise to do just that and at the time of His choosing that He will work in that child's heart ~ maybe even before the child has the ability to make a credible profession of faith. It is an outward sign, not only to the parents but even for all who witness it, of God's promise to save. And the prayer for the infant is that he or she would never know a day when he or she doesn't know Jesus as his or her Savior and Brother and Friend.

making it a prerequisite for church membership and the Lord's Supper, with immersion being the preferred mode to depict Christ's death and resurrection.

Key Requirements for Baptism:

  1. Regeneration & Faith: The person must have experienced regeneration by the Holy Spirit, leading to a genuine, conscious faith in Christ as Savior and Lord.
  2. Repentance: A turning away from sin and toward God is essential, demonstrated by a confession and a transformed life.
  3. Public Profession: A verifiable, public declaration of this faith and repentance is required, often in a church setting.
  4. Union with Christ: Baptism signifies the believer's spiritual identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3-
  5. Believers Baptism: Only those who have consciously professed faith are to be baptized (credobaptism), rejecting infant baptism (paedobaptism).
Yeah, again, disagree. Points 1, 3, and 5 in particular. Again, it's all due to a misunderstanding, really, of what baptism is.

Ah, yes, on point number 4 there, maybe you didn't finish the citation... verses 3 through something in Romans 6, which would include verse 4... You might notice that, while Paul does say, "we were buried with Jesus by baptism into death," but he says nothing there (or anywhere) about having been believers when they were, and of course says nothing about believing being a prerequisite to being buried with Jesus by baptism into death.

And if you look at Colossians 2:11-12 ~ where, in verse 12, he says the same thing, that we were "buried with Him in baptism" ~ you should be able to see there that baptism, in the times of the early church, has replaced the old sign and seal of the covenant, circumcision, which was administered by God's ordinance ~ which is an authoritative order; a decree ~ given to Abraham in Genesis 17:9-10, where God says, "As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised... He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised."

So we can... and should... have our children even as early as possible buried with Jesus in baptism. And in doing so, we trust that God, in His time, at His appointment, by His Holy Spirit, baptize with the Holy Spirit and therein give that person, at whatever age that happens, because it might be decades later, new life in the Spirit, and he or she would then walk in that newness of life.

What it Signifies
  • An Ordinance, Not a Sacrament: It's a command from Christ (Matthew 28:19) and a picture of grace, not a means of conferring grace itself.
It's a sacrament, just as was the former sacrament, circumcision, which was instituted as the sign and seal of God's covenant by ordinance, God's authoritative order, along with the sacrament of communion, or the Lord's supper.

  • Covenantal: It's seen as the New Covenant sign for believers, contrasting with Old Covenant circumcision.
Agreed. Great! Except... well, it's a sign for all. But yes, baptism has replaced circumcision, but it's institution and proper administration is unchanged. Now, how old were children who were circumcised? You will see in Genesis 17:12... <smile> If you compare what God says to Abraham in Genesis 17 to what Peter says in Acts 2, you will see that what they say about the sign/seal of the covenant is very, very similar.

  • Immersion: The Greek word baptizo (dip/immerse) and the symbolism of dying/rising with Christ make immersion the appropriate method.
That's also debatable. Jesus was baptized in an area of the Jordan river by John where the water would have only come up to His ankles... <smile> And there is much in the Bible about sprinkling... <smile> Baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling water upon the person. But the mode of baptism is not of great importance; I was baptized myself by full immersion, and there's nothing really wrong with that. But... you might agree that Ezekiel 36:25-27 is a picture of how we are saved by God, even of our new birth by the Spirit, and if so, I would agree, but notice verse 25 there, where God says of His baptism of us in our regeneration, "I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you." So again I say, baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling water.

  • Prerequisite: It's a necessary step for formal church membership and participation in the Lord's Supper.
This I agree with; yes, we welcome someone as a communing member when the person makes a credible profession of faith. It's as much an admonition to the church as to the person, because unless the person actually comes to Christ first, the sacrament of communion will do that person no good, even bringing condemnation upon that person, and if we allow it then we ourselves bear a responsibility here.

Grace and peace to you.
 

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
16,509
4,788
113
71
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
It does. Circumcision used to be, in the days of the Israelites, and baptism is, since Jesus's first coming, the sign and seal of the covenant. Which is not to be denied anyone for any reason, and given to all children, even infants of believers.
The church has no covenant ! It is not a sign of anything other than one has already been saved! We are beneficiaries of the blessings of the new Covenant god made with Israel!
Where did I claim/state/imply that INFANT BAPTISM is a salvation requirement ?
""so how does this glorify god?""
The same way that any public demonstration of faith shows a belief in Christ :)

If you read my post, you would see I did not say anything baptismal regeneration
Fair enough, at least you admit to the implication. But it is explicit.
Then show where infant baptism is explicit then.
It does, because baptism is, like circumcision used to be, the sign and seal of the covenant. And circumcision, by commandment of God, was to be administered at the age of eight days. Not eight years, Ronald, but eight days.
If I wrote 8 tears, that is my bad.
Baptism:
  • "And Peter said to them, 'Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to Himself'” (Acts 2:38-39)
  • "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, having been buried with Him in baptism..." (Colossians 2:11-12).
The promise is for us and our children. But it has nothing to do with a command to baptize babies! You have abandoned proper grammar to promote a myth.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Christian Soldier

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
16,509
4,788
113
71
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Where did I claim/state/imply that INFANT BAPTISM is a salvation requirement ?
""so how does this glorify god?""
The same way that any public demonstration of faith shows a belief in Christ :)
I never saID ANYTHING ABOUT INFANT REGENERATION THROUGH BAPTISM.