I understand brother. Like I have said to the other brother I respectfully disagree. But I really disagree with Baptists who would take a purely symbolic view as well and I believe it should be seen as a means of grace, in that it confers on us the rights of visible church membership. This gives us (with introspection) admittance to the table. I don’t see scripturally the warrant for permission towards one ordinance to the visible covenant community and the withholding of the other. This seems to be an appellation to tradition. Which does not invalidate it but just does not appease my conscious on the subject for the aforementioned logical inconsistencies.
@BlkRobeRegiment Scripture does not say. It says rather he came to belief, I guess his parents faith must not have been good enough for Phillip? Would one be welcome to the table at your church if their parents were believers?
You understand we both know how this debate goes correct?
I doubt very seriously either of us is going to be brought to conversion on this via X. I mean you have Zealot in your handle.
That was not the topic from OP though was it?
I’ve learned much from Luther and his descendants and respect your great tradition as some of the most academically rigorous and theologically sound. However, I simply disagree with what you are explaining I believe the inward washing of regeneration by the Spirit is the sign and seal of the covenant. While the outward visible sign exhibits what cannot be seen and is to mark our entrance into the church. Was Abraham saved by circumcision? No his FAITH was imputed unto him as righteousness. His circumcision demarcated his entrance into the visible church.
Also, your view is inconsistent and creates different levels or classes of membership in the one indivisible body. With much love and respect to my Lutheran brethren I simply cannot affirm this when my conscious is held captive by the Word of God.
I completely agree. However, photo recorded speeding tickets and etc present similar if not identical concerns and are usually administered by a third party. I am simply saying we have seeded way too much authority already for lesser benefit. I’m glad people have hyped privacy but it was an obvious eventuality.
A warrant I would be none the wiser that they had obtained until I was already caught for whatever action. It’s not like they need the physical phone to obtain the data. I likewise don’t have to have a car. Not trying to be disagreeable, I’m glad people are concerned. I just think it’s misplaced or misguided.
You sure? What did Philip tell the eunuch about baptism? If you believe then you may. that is conditional. Actually faith preceded every New Testament Baptism and Baptism was conditional upon it. How can an infant come any closer to true faith than to introspection? Is denying them the table introducing a secondary class of covenant member equal in practical participatory abilities with members living outside the will of God and being excluded?
The best parallel would be 1 Col 2:11-12 speaking of the circumcision not made by hands and recognizing the comparison of the example laid forth in Christs work. 1 Peter 3:21 Peter qualifies the statement that baptism now saves by recognizing it’s not the outward washing, but rather the inward appeal of the conscience. Order or operations in Acts 10:44-48.
But of course you knew my answer to all this, and I likewise can expect exactly what your rebuttal will be. Almost like this has been a long ongoing intermural conversation we both have little to probably contribute to beyond what has been said by men at least much wiser than myself.
However, in specific question by OP was directed to Baptists on Baptist doctrine. I simply am saying that what was said may permeate in novel Baptist denoms and such but it is not historic Baptist doctrine.
Meanwhile in the construction field taking the wrong person to dinner can cost you participation in federal project bid meetings. I do follow brother, I just think we seem to have a different line. I do think given enough mental clarity we would all recognize it compromises credibility. Fair enough?
My association has never permitted Sunday Schools, Youth Groups, or VBS’s and has a pretty decent current retention rate. Also, we only have congregational singing. The time when the saints are assembled should be for the joint collective worship of all gathered, not segregation by non mandated arbitrary age groups. The family should be together from the moment they walk in till they walk out.
No sir. My church was formed in 1846 as a member of a United Baptist Association. It was legally armed from churches tracing their identity back to the Separates and Regulars, which were the original Baptistic denoms outside of the General (Freewill) Baptists. My sister church down the road is circa 1815. So prior to the Triennial Convention. We hold as well as do must United’s, Old Regulars and Primitives to a strict Amill perspective and would strongly debate this foolish and novel perspective. This seems to be a wonderful representation of 1 John 2:19, and why we discontinued fellowship with such bodies.
I do agree the current political parties are deplorable. We have in essence the Democratic Party which is mainly a socialist regime either a a dem facade, and then the Republican Party which just lags 5 years behind in accepting the other parties values. Can’t help feeling that this is just subversion though of the highest order. I would much like to see who is contributing to this movement.