countmeout.ie

Mark Hamill

Jakkass wrote: »

This is my exact point. This is the reason why we cannot definitively rule out anything either. It is to be openly discussed within the Christian community. Philippians gives useful advice for dealing with what is not clear or what is not revealed:



We can discuss the merits of adult baptism vs infant baptism in a clear manner without reading too much into the lines at all. There could have been teenagers there, and there could have been children. We can't base it on assumptions so we have to be open to other forms surely?

It's not the clearest of subjects

Maybe there should be some sort of test then. If someone wants to be baptised, then they are declaring their desire to become part of the christian family (or covenant) and so they should be able to explain why they want this in a mature way.

ocianain

Flamed Diving wrote: »

So, once baptised, there is no way back.

Do you think that it is a bit cruel to force this on an infant?

Are you saying the website is pointless, in that case?

You can't be un-Baptized, you can believe anything you want. You can be agnostic, an atheist, a Christian of any persuasion, whatever, but you are still Baptized.

Flamed Diving

ocianain wrote: »

You can't be un-Baptized, you can believe anything you want. You can be agnostic, an atheist, a Christian of any persuasion, whatever, but you are still Baptized.

Fits right in with the child abuse, then.

JimiTime

ocianain wrote: »

You can't be un-Baptized, you can believe anything you want. You can be agnostic, an atheist, a Christian of any persuasion, whatever, but you are still Baptized.

Which means what exactly?

ocianain

Some info on Baptism:

Infant Baptism
Early Teachings of Infant Baptism (Fathers*)
Baptism Immersion Only
Baptismal Grace (Fathers*)
Born Again in Baptism (Fathers*)
Trinitarian_Baptism (Fathers*)
Necessity of Baptism (Fathers*)


Again, baptism is how one entered into a covental relationship with God, rather than ask, "Why early baptism?" I would ask, "Why wait to start a relationship with God?" Again, infant baptism continues the practice of the Jews of infants being received into the old covenant. Infant baptism was expanded to include women though! Women were covered under the OC by marriage, not so under Christianity

JimiTime

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Fits right in with the child abuse, then.

LOL:D

I move to have the above as an automatic response to FD postings in the Christianity Forum.

ocianain

JimiTime wrote: »

Which means what exactly?

Baptism doesn't compel belief. It's how one enters into a convenantal relationship with God.

JimiTime

ocianain wrote: »

Some info on Baptism:

Infant Baptism
Early Teachings of Infant Baptism (Fathers*)
Baptism Immersion Only
Baptismal Grace (Fathers*)
Born Again in Baptism (Fathers*)
Trinitarian_Baptism (Fathers*)
Necessity of Baptism (Fathers*)


Again, baptism is how one entered into a covental relationship with God, rather than ask, "Why early baptism?" I would ask, "Why wait to start a relationship with God?" Again, infant baptism continues the practice of the Jews of infants being received into the old covenant. Infant baptism was expanded to include women though! Women were covered under the OC by marriage, not so under Christianity

Does being baptised in the RCC mean anything if that person turns out to be for example, a satanist? Or is it that, 'Yeah you are a satanist who was baptised as a baby'? Just like a matter of fact type thing? Or does that baptism still have some meaning in the eyes of the RCC?

JimiTime

ocianain wrote: »

Baptism doesn't compel belief. It's how one enters into a convenantal relationship with God.

So its a symbol of the covenant?

ocianain

JimiTime wrote: »

Does being baptised in the RCC mean anything if that person turns out to be for example, a satanist? Or is it that, 'Yeah you are a satanist who was baptised as a baby'? Just like a matter of fact type thing? Or does that baptism still have some meaning in the eyes of the RCC?

That person is still Baptized, if he dies unrepentant he's in trouble. A Catholc sinning is alwas a concern to the Church.

philologos

ocianain wrote: »

Baptism doesn't compel belief. It's how one enters into a convenantal relationship with God.

How can one enter into a relationship without knowledge of doing so?

prinz

Jakkass wrote: »

How can one enter into a relationship without knowledge of doing so?

Would you be concerned with circumcision as it is in the Bible, on the same grounds?

ocianain

JimiTime wrote: »

So its a symbol of the covenant?

It's a sign, symbol could imply no efficacy just a symbol. The sign of the Noahic Covenant was the rainbow, Abrahamic circumcision.

robindch

Jakkass wrote: »

How can one enter into a relationship without knowledge of doing so?

Same way that we're "tainted with original sin" without having committed it?

JimiTime

I'm going to take the baptism debate to a new thread if anyone wants to follow.

Flamed Diving

Yeah, it has strayed quite far off-topic.

Mark Hamill

JimiTime wrote: »

I'm going to take the baptism debate to a new thread if anyone wants to follow.

OK, I will put my responses to ocianain in that thread then.