The Apostles taught Infant Baptism!

[DesiredHaven]

You don't think God was with you, at your most vulnerable time in life, being an infant? You don't think God was with you as you were the focal point of the baptism sacrament? You don't think God was with you as your then church family beared witness to your baptism and proclaimed in His name that they would raise you in the Word?

On another note, I couldn't care less if people agree with me or not, that's not why I'm here. I'm here to learn, share and glorify God. God was glorified at your baptism; don't think for a second God was not in attendance. No, my sister, something much more happened on that day than you just getting wet.

Sorry, I disagree,

Paul is just asking if they had even received the Holy Ghost when they BELIEVED here

Acst 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye BELIEVED?

And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

Why did Paul go on to tell them how they just slapped God in the face? And how they must be faithless for thinking God was not with them at their most vulnerable etc etc etc.

They even BELEIVED

Acts 19:3And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

They were water baptized, John prepared the way before Christ,

Acts 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

They THEN believed on him that should come after, even Christ Jesus (who would baptize with the Holy Ghost and fire)

Acts 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

I dont really respond to emotional type appeals in these kinds of things.

Men of God should teach the scriptures and not do that otherwise I will reject your knowledge if your instruction amounts to nothing more then that.

 

[Utah]

The Bible doesn't teach water baptizes for remission of sin. John the Baptist came preaching the baptism of repentance, meaning he preached that men should repent to prepare for salvation from Jesus, baptizing them in water as a sign of their repentance. His water baptism became a way of life for many.

Jesus then came saying in Matthew 26:28 (KJV) [SUP]28 [/SUP] For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

The blood of Jesus is what remits, forgives unto liberation, our sin, washing us clean. Infant baptism amounts to no more than putting a tattoo on their body as a sign of parental decision. I supppose that would not be a sin to do that, as the Bible doesn't say not to do it. Get the point?

What I get is that baptizing an infant is glorifying to God, and baptized infants who grow into Christian adults need not be baptized again. That said, however, I was baptized as an infant but made the decision to be baptized as an adult also, not because my first baptism was null and void, but because I wanted to embrace the experience as a cognitive man of faith.

 

[SeaBass]

Is it in the Bible that we are NOT to baptize infants/children?

Yes, baptism is for sinners who need their sins remitted, infants have no sins therefore are not candidates for baptism. One must have faith before he can be baptized and infants baptized without faith is not pleasing to God. Heb 11:6

 

[SeaBass]

Again, Jesus was not born of Adam's seed, no man involved in his conception. The promise in the Garden was to the woman and her seed. Genesis 3:15 (KJV) [SUP]15 [/SUP] And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. is the basis for the virgin birth, putting Jesus on the same original earthly advantage Adam had before Adam sinned.

When will folks quit making false doctrines by plucking verses out of context? Your quote from Peter is wrongly used. Look at the context. I bolded in blue the part you emphasized. I will underline qualifiers in red.
1 Peter 3:18-22 (KJV)
[SUP]18 [/SUP] For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
[SUP]19 [/SUP] By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
[SUP]20 [/SUP] Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
[SUP]21 [/SUP] The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
[SUP]22 [/SUP] Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

What saves us is
1. Christ suffered for us the just and unjust, to bring us to God
2. Put to death, shedding his blood
3. Brought back to life (resurrected)
4. Preached the gospel again
5. Looks for our good conscience
6. Gone to heaven for our sake
7. On the right hand of God, our advocate

Water baptism is a figure like Noah's ark. The relationship of the two figures, the ark and water baptism, is like this: the ark floated on the water, separated from God's wrath. The water was destroying the earth. The ark contained the people. The people were saved by God in the ark on the water. We are saved in Christ separated from the wrath of God. Had Noah and family jumped into the water they would have drowned.

When we submit to salvation, we are spiritually crucified with Christ, believing on him and repenting of sin (like the soldier did at the cross). Next we die with, are buried with Christ, dead to sin, the figure of water baptism being a sign of taking part in what Jesus did and buried to sin. Upon rising from the water it is a figure of our resurrection with Christ unto the new life, forgiven, able to follow him.

Being dunked in water doesn't accomplish that. It is a sign we have submitted to that experience in Christ.

No infant could choose to make that decision. No parent could save an infant by wetting him with H2O regardless of powerful prayers or high ranking priests attending. RCC folks believe it anyway, like they believe the wafers and wine literally become the body and blood of Jesus to be consumed. It's heresy.

Jesus was of Adam's seed, Lk 3:23,38.

Phil 2:7,8 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

Heb 2:16,17 "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people."

Jesus took on the nature of man, made in the likeness of man. If man is born with inherited sin, so was Christ. Since Christ took on the nature of man then He too physically died as a consequence of Adam's sin.

================================

--1 Pet 3:21 Peter said baptism doth also now save us. Baptism saves and nothing in the immediate verse/context changes the fact that baptism saves, no matter how mad they may make people.

--The phrase "lie figure" used on the KJV in 1 PEt 3:21 id from the Greek word antitypos...anti-type. Anti-type means a mirror reflection, a counterpart. A die would be the type. The imprint a die leaves behind in metal would be the anti-type to the die the imprint is a mirror reflection of the die.

The OT type to NT Peter is making:

OT type--------saved by water, verse 20
NTantitype----saved by water verse 21

The NT anti-type is a mirror reflection to that OT type. Peter said 'saved by WATER' he did not say "saved by the ark" in v20. Both the ark and water played a role in Noah's salvation and in this context Peter is pointing out the role water played in Noah's salvation and our salvation.

Baptism is not for washing away filth of the flesh but baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God. Conscience has to do with one's conscientiousness of sin. Example, in Acts 2, Peter in his sermon convicted his Jewish hearers of crucifying the Messiah. They became "pricked in their hearts". Their conscience became guilty for that sin so much so they asked Peter "what shall we do?". The "ANSWER" Peter gave them for their guilty conscience was to repent and be baptized in the name of the Lord for the remission of sins. Having their sins remitted in baptism was 'the answer' for their guilty conscience.


Since God has chosen baptism as the means of salvation by remitting sins in baptism, and infants have no sins, then infants cannot be baptized for remission of sins..

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Jesus was of Adam's seed, Lk 3:23,38.

Phil 2:7,8 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

Heb 2:16,17 "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people."

Jesus took on the nature of man, made in the likeness of man.

That's not the same thing as "being of Adam's seed." That would mean that He inherited the sin of Adam through the flesh, and would be disqualified as Savior, the propitiation of our sin.

 

[SeaBass]

That's not the same thing as "being of Adam's seed." That would mean that He inherited the sin of Adam through the flesh, and would be disqualified as Savior, the propitiation of our sin.

Jesus was a physical descendant of Adam just like the rest of us. You cannot make infants sinner then try and come up with exceptions or Christ. The fact there is no original sin means Christ could be born as other men without sin.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Jesus was a physical descendant of Adam just like the rest of us.

You know, you just espoused Mormon doctrine, right? You're a Christ denier, making Him a man, not God. You could get banned for that. Want to retract your statement?

 

[Utah]

Yes, baptism is for sinners who need their sins remitted, infants have no sins therefore are not candidates for baptism. One must have faith before he can be baptized and infants baptized without faith is not pleasing to God. Heb 11:6

God is most definitely pleased with the faith of those requesting the baptism of the infant.

 

[Utah]

I dont really respond to emotional type appeals in these kinds of things.

Men of God should teach the scriptures and not do that otherwise I will reject your knowledge if your instruction amounts to nothing more then that.

No emotions here, just stating Scriptural fact:

Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.

Suffer the little children to come unto me.

Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

For the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

How call folks read where God time and again expresses His love for us and yet say God is not part of infant baptism?
In everything we do, do to the glory of God.

 

[JesusistheChrist]

Jesus was of Adam's seed, Lk 3:23,38.

No, He wasn't and you've veered off into great heresy here:

Luke chapter 3

[23] And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
[24] Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
[25] Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
[26] Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
[27] Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
[28] Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
[29] Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
[30] Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
[31] Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
[32] Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
[33] Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
[34] Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
[35] Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
[36] Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
[37] Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
[38] Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

You've neglected the "being (as supposed) the son of Joseph" part. IOW, you've neglected the virgin birth in that Joseph wasn't Jesus' true father and therefore Jesus wasn't truly a descendant of Adam. In fact, Jesus is referred to as "the second man" and "the last Adam":

I Corinthians chapter 15

[45] And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
[46] Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
[47] The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

From God's vantage point, there are only "two Adams" or "two men". There is "the first Adam" in whom all die (except for those Christians who are alive and remain at the Lord's second coming) and there is "the last Adam" in whom all are made alive or in whom we must be born again:

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." (I Corinthians 15:22)

Anyhow, what you said about Jesus being a descendant of Adam is a great heresy and you need to repent of the same.

 

[Word_Swordsman]

Rom 3:12 "They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

Again, the verse does not prove your point but proves mine. It does NOT say thy were "born out of the way" or "born unprofitable". So the verse does not describe how people are born but what they choose to become, showing personal culpability.

Psalm 51:2-6 (KJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP] Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
[SUP]3 [/SUP] For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.
[SUP]4 [/SUP] Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.
[SUP]5 [/SUP] Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.

Let's move on to John 8:41-45 (KJV) written concerning Jesus speaking to unredeemed men....
[SUP]41 [/SUP] Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
[SUP]42 [/SUP] Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
[SUP]43 [/SUP] Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
[SUP]44 [/SUP] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
[SUP]45 [/SUP] And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Christians have a new, wonderful, righteous Father.

Everybody on earth today begins as "children of wrath", then hopefully ends upenjoying Ephesians 2:1-3 (KJV)
[SUP]1 [/SUP] And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
[SUP]2 [/SUP] Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
[SUP]3 [/SUP] Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

One either believes the Bible or believes one's own understanding. One does things God's way, or does what is right in his own eyes.

It is folly to state in any manner you were born free of that natural condition, that one becomes a sinner. over time. We are all born that way. If a man could "become" a sinner, he could save himself by trying to meet the righteousness required by God. Our works are not enough. Whatever works of righteousnes that come out of man is as filthy rags. Why that? Because the unrighteous man has an evil father that lies, and his children lie because of his father.

 

[SeaBass]

You know, you just espoused Mormon doctrine, right? You're a Christ denier, making Him a man, not God. You could get banned for that. Want to retract your statement?

Jesus came to earth in the flesh as a man..."In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.....And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." Jn 1:1,14.

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." 1 Tim 3:16

Phil 2:7,8 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

Heb 2:16,17 "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people."


You deny the bible's teaching Christ was God in the flesh?

 

[SeaBass]

God is most definitely pleased with the faith of those requesting the baptism of the infant.

Not according to Heb 11:6.

 

[DesiredHaven]

No emotions here, just stating Scriptural fact:

Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.

Suffer the little children to come unto me.

Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

For the unbelieving husband is made holy through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

How call folks read where God time and again expresses His love for us and yet say God is not part of infant baptism?
In everything we do, do to the glory of God.

No Utah you werent, saying I slapped God in the face is not stating a scriptural fact.

I dont see how Jesus is speaking of an infant baptism when he says, Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens.

Can you explain how infants be weary and carry thee heavy burdens?

What did you do google for some common catholic infant baptism prooftexts?

How are these scriptural facts concerning infant baptism?

Here is the full verse (of the half verse you posted)

He says,

Jerm 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Even John the baptist was filled with the Holy Ghost from the womb

Luke 1:15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.

Didnt the Pharisees and lawyers didnt know that before they were in the womb he knew them and both sanctified and ordained them?

Because for them it says,

Luke 7:30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.

Although all of these that heard John

Luke 7:29 And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John.

I dont understand how any of those apply to infant baptism though.

 

[fordman]

Nowhere does it read in Scripture of children raised in believing households reaching the age of reason and then being baptized. The only explicit baptism accounts in the Bible involveconverts from Judaism or paganism. For children of believers there is no explicit mention of baptism—either in infancy or later. Given the silence of the New Testament, why not assume Christian baptism is only for adult converts? With this being said, I'd like someone to show where it says in Scripture that Baptisim is strickly for adults only. Good Luck!

Pax Christi


"because he has looked upon the humiliation of his servant. Yes, from now onwards all generations will call me blessed' ---Luke 1:48

 

[SeaBass]

No, He wasn't and you've veered off into great heresy here:

Luke chapter 3

[23] And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
[24] Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
[25] Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
[26] Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
[27] Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
[28] Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
[29] Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
[30] Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
[31] Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
[32] Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
[33] Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
[34] Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
[35] Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
[36] Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
[37] Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
[38] Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

You've neglected the "being (as supposed) the son of Joseph" part. IOW, you've neglected the virgin birth in that Joseph wasn't Jesus' true father and therefore Jesus wasn't truly a descendant of Adam. In fact, Jesus is referred to as "the second man" and "the last Adam":

I Corinthians chapter 15

[45] And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
[46] Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
[47] The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

From God's vantage point, there are only "two Adams" or "two men". There is "the first Adam" in whom all die (except for those Christians who are alive and remain at the Lord's second coming) and there is "the last Adam" in whom all are made alive or in whom we must be born again:

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." (I Corinthians 15:22)

Anyhow, what you said about Jesus being a descendant of Adam is a great heresy and you need to repent of the same.

Lk 3 plainly shows that Christ was a descendant of Adam. Why was Christ some times referred to as the "son of man" if he were not a descendant of Adam?

In Lk 3:23 Heli was the father of Mary. Luke is giving the lineage of Mary, from Jesus to Mary all the way to Adam. Joseph was NOT the son of Heli but of Jacob, Mat 1:16.


Coffman Commentary: (my emp)
The solid evidence that supports this (Luke giving Mary's lineage) is in the Greek text itself, where the article "the" is omitted before the name of Joseph, and yet is found before all the names in the long list without exception, save for this solitary omission. What does it mean? Godet said: "The omission of the article puts the name (Joseph) outside of the genealogical series." Robertson said, "This would indicate that `Joseph' belongs in the parenthesis ... (it should) read thus, `being son (as supposed of Joseph) of Heli, etc.'"Jesus was thus the grandson of Hell, "grandson" being an absolutely legitimate meaning of "son" as used in Jewish genealogies. As a matter of fact, the word "son" in such tables also had the meaning of "son by creation" (as in Luke 3:38), and sometimes even "son-in-law." It is the context that must determine the meaning. In no case would the name of Mary have appeared in the direct line of such genealogies, being contrary to Jewish custom. This necessitated the listing of Jesus as the "son (grandson) of Hell." It certainly cannot be proved that this interpretation is incorrect.

 

[DesiredHaven]

I always liked this genealogy video,

[video=youtube;U3bsAMyRwbw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3bsAMyRwbw[/video]

 

[SeaBass]

Psalm 51:2-6 (KJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP] Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
[SUP]3 [/SUP] For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.
[SUP]4 [/SUP] Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.
[SUP]5 [/SUP] Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
[SUP]6 [/SUP] Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.

Let's move on to John 8:41-45 (KJV) written concerning Jesus speaking to unredeemed men....
[SUP]41 [/SUP] Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
[SUP]42 [/SUP] Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
[SUP]43 [/SUP] Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
[SUP]44 [/SUP] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
[SUP]45 [/SUP] And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Christians have a new, wonderful, righteous Father.

Everybody on earth today begins as "children of wrath", then hopefully ends upenjoying Ephesians 2:1-3 (KJV)
[SUP]1 [/SUP] And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
[SUP]2 [/SUP] Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
[SUP]3 [/SUP] Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

One either believes the Bible or believes one's own understanding. One does things God's way, or does what is right in his own eyes.

It is folly to state in any manner you were born free of that natural condition, that one becomes a sinner. over time. We are all born that way. If a man could "become" a sinner, he could save himself by trying to meet the righteousness required by God. Our works are not enough. Whatever works of righteousnes that come out of man is as filthy rags. Why that? Because the unrighteous man has an evil father that lies, and his children lie because of his father.

In Eph 2:3 the word "nature" can carry the meaning "a mode of feeling and acting which by long habit has become nature", Thayer. If one participates in an activity for a long time, it become part of his nature. The context tells us those Ephesians "walked according to the course of this world" and " had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind" The context tells us those Ephesians had practiced sin for so long that sinning became part of their nature, not how they were born.

Secondly, "in verse three Paul affirms that all of us “were . . . children of wrath.” The verb emetha (“were”) is an imperfect tense form. The imperfect tense describes continuity of action as viewed in the past. Thus, here it depicts the habitual style of life which had characterized these saints prior to their conversion. Had the apostle intended to convey the notion of inherited sinfulness at the time of their birth, he easily could have expressed that idea by saying, “you became by birth children of wrath.”.... it is also significant that the verb is in the middle voice in the Greek Testament. The middle voice is employed to suggest the subject’s personal involvement in the action of the verb. The language therefore stresses that the sinful condition of the Ephesians had been their individual responsibility. Hence, combining the imperfect tense and middle voice aspects of the verb, we might paraphrase the passage thusly: “you kept on making yourselves children of wrath.”


Lastly, "note that in verse one the apostle plainly declares that spiritual death is the consequence of “your trespasses and sins” (ASV). Note the word “your.” This emphasizes personal sin. We are not spiritually dead as a result of Adam’s transgression. Though the term “your” is not found in the King James Version (following the Textus Receptus), it is amply supported by evidence from ancient Greek manuscripts, early versions, and the writings of the “church fathers” in the post-apostolic period (Salmond 1956, 283)."
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/43-are-infants-by-nature-children-of-wrath
by Wayne Jackson

 

[SeaBass]

Nowhere does it read in Scripture of children raised in believing households reaching the age of reason and then being baptized. The only explicit baptism accounts in the Bible involveconverts from Judaism or paganism. For children of believers there is no explicit mention of baptism—either in infancy or later. Given the silence of the New Testament, why not assume Christian baptism is only for adult converts? With this being said, I'd like someone to show where it says in Scripture that Baptisim is strickly for adults only. Good Luck!

Pax Christi


"because he has looked upon the humiliation of his servant. Yes, from now onwards all generations will call me blessed' ---Luke 1:48

Age of Accountability:

Rom 7:8,9 " For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died."

Paul says in verse 8 that without law sin is dead. Then Paul says he was "without law" once. That means there was once in Paul's life that sin was dead to him, that would be when he was an infant. As Paul mentally, intellectually matured, God's commandment came to him, he became accountable to God and that is when sin sprang up in him. His innocence as a child was now gone and "I died" that is, died spiritually. Sin was not something Paul was born with but sprang up in him later in life.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Jesus came to earth in the flesh as a man..."In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.....And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." Jn 1:1,14.

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." 1 Tim 3:16

Phil 2:7,8 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

Heb 2:16,17 "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people."


You deny the bible's teaching Christ was God in the flesh?

No, but unlike you, I read the Scriptures and see that He is not "descended" from Adam. He is wholly man and wholly God, and where His genealogy reflects the first part, His DNA would deny it completely. He had no Earthly lineage except through adoption by Joseph. His "father" is the Holy Spirit. When you claim Him to be a blood/genetic descendent of Adam, you deny His Godhood.

The Bible presents Adam as the first man, and gives the Lord Jesus Christ the curious title of "the last Adam" in 1 Corinthians 15:45. You don't know the difference in the two, it is obvious. He is never called the "Son of Adam" and while He is called "the son of David" that is only due to His being the fulfillment of the prophecy of the seed of David in 2 Samuel 7:14-16. The Bible is very clear that Jesus did not begin to exist in the womb of Mary, therefore, as God, He has no genetic material from the gene pool of man. As the Second Person of the Trinity, He exists outside of the physical universe of time, space, and matter and with the Father and Spirit created the physical world.

Every man and woman on earth inherit the sin nature because no man and woman on earth had, nor ever will ever have, the same full connection Jesus had with God. And Christ's baptism of believers -- that is, the baptism of the Holy Spirit given because of our saving faith in Christ through the grace of God alone -- frees us from the sin nature because it is our sins that matter from that point forward, but our "set apartness," our being made holy in Christ.