[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / erp / fast / hydrus / kind / lewd / mai / pdfs / tech ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Archive
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Voice recorder Show voice recorder

(the Stop button will be clickable 5 seconds after you press Record)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


| Rules | Log | Tor | Wiki | Bunker |

File: 14fcf436f4953f2⋯.jpg (327.55 KB, 3006x1987, 3006:1987, why_baptism.jpg)

419f9b  No.833755

Should it be by immersion or pouring/sprinkling?

____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4d6887  No.833756

Immersion.

1. It is only ever by immersion in the Bible

2. John needed "much water" in order to baptize. If you can do it by sprinkling then much water is not needed

"And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there:"

3. It symbolizes Jesus's death, burial, and resurrection.

The death by you going down into the water, burial by you being in the water, and resurrectionby you coming up out of the water.

You don't bury someone by sprinkling dirt on their forhead

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

also related to it is you needing to believe in order to be baptzed

1. It's what the Bible says, and babies can't believe

36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?

37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

2. The point of baptism is to show others you have accepted Jesus as savior, and to then walk in newness of life. How would a baby show they believe in Jesus when they can't? Or to walk in newness of life?

Same scriptures as above for walking in newness of life

And babies can't continue stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

b3b8cf  No.833757

the original 'baptizo' is broad enough to incorperate pouring as well as immersion.

as for tradition AD.70 Didache says:

>Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water [that is, in running water, as in a river]. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4d6887  No.833758

>>833756

Also people say you need to be baptized in order to be saved. Proving that wrong would be the literally over hundred verses teaching it's whosoever believeth.

But for the three most common that people bring up I'll show why it does not teach that.

Mark 16:15

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

This verse does not say what happens to a person that belivees and is not baptized, only someone that believes and is baptized and someone that does not believe. Let's say Person A believes and is baptized, Person B believes and is not baptized, and Person C does not believe. According to this verse A goes to Heaven and C goes to Hell, but says nothing about B. According to John 3:36 "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." Person A and B go to Heaven and C goes to Hell.

John 3:5

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

They will say being "born of water" is being baptized. No, being born of water is being physically born, and they will usually leave out verse 6 "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." which Jesus compares being born of water with being born of the flesh, and being born of the spirit with being born of the spirit.

1 Peter 3:21

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:

They will take the part where it says "baptism doth also now save us" and say that proves it, but no, it's "The like figure" that saves us, not baptism. And the like figure is the death, burial, and ressurection of Christ. Colossians 2:12 12 "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."

>>833757

>not scripture

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9ad4c1  No.833759

>>833757

>the original 'baptizo' is broad enough to incorperate pouring as well as immersion.

Reference? Concordances don't typically say this https://biblehub.com/str/greek/907.htm

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

bece48  No.833773

>>833758

>>not scripture

Those who wrote the didache were native Greek speakers and knew the verb baptizo could include pouring as well as immersion. Baptists are so low iq

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9ad4c1  No.833779

>>833773

Have you even read it?

>Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in running water. But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water; and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

Pouring is last resort, exceptional

What Greek language authority can you reference which says "baptizo" literally can mean pouring?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4d6887  No.833782

>>833773

Or they could have also just denied scripture like the RCC always does.

The Greek Orthodox church dunks becasue the that's what the word means.

also it's wrong for the other reasons too >>833756

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

856bb5  No.833783

Sin is okay because you can forgive yourself. …

But if you don't do a full dunk, you can't get to heaven.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

cb1ae4  No.833886

>>833783

Woah ive never seen such a low quality s—post. I really expected more from Catholic. Aren't you guys supposed to have 2000 years of Apostolic tradition on how to roast heretics? sad.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4d6887  No.833981

bump

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

b3b8cf  No.833982

>>833755

why do baptists care about this, aren;t they zwinglians?

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

3f5f64  No.834008

Baptism is properly done by triple immersion. Only in exceptional circumstances should it be done by pouring or sprinkling. I know the Baptist will dispute this but the Didache does prescribe pouring in exceptional circumstances. Baptist heterodox don't even baptize right though, they only do a single immersion which reflective of Modalism.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9ad4c1  No.834011

>>834008

The Didache is not scripture. It can not be used to prove baptism must be by triple immersion.

Baptists typically baptize by one immersion in the name of the three persons. This isn't modalism.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

3f5f64  No.834013

>>834011

Just because the Didache isn't scripture/divinely inspired doesn't mean it's not useful. It records many traditions from the 1st century Church which are equal to what we find in scripture because both come from the same source, the apostles. Baptism by a single immersion in the name of the three persons of the Trinity is Modalism because it's not making distinctions between the persons. Baptists practice a Modalisitc form of baptism which is not in line with the historical Trinitarian baptism. I know Baptists are not Modalist but their baptism is Modalist and therefore heterodox and cannot be accepted by the Orthodox Church.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

9ad4c1  No.834014

>>834013

I agree it's useful.

>equal to what we find in scripture

Absolutely not

> I know Baptists are not Modalist but their baptism is Modalis

No, it isn't

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

3f5f64  No.834015

>>834014

>Absolutely not

Absolutely yes. It reflects many of the same traditions we find in the Orthodox Church now because they are the same traditions which are of the apostles. The Didache proves the traditions of the Orthodox Church. Sola scriptura, on the other hand, is a Protestant heresy.

>No, it isn't

Yes it is because it fails to make distinctions between the persons of the Trinity.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4d6887  No.834027

>>834013

>It records many traditions from the 1st century Church

Which proves literally nothing because Paul even says how there are heretics corrupting the word of God in his day

>which are equal to what we find in scripture

Not even close, the Didache isn't divinely inspired by God

>both come from the same source, the apostles.

No, and scripture overides anything else since it's the only thing divinely inspired. The apostles when they weren't writing scripture could have made a mistake

>Baptism by a single immersion in the name of the three persons of the Trinity is Modalism because it's not making distinctions between the persons

I get what you're saying, but if you get dunked once in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, you're still following Matthew 28:19. And you don't see anyone in acts or the epistles seem to say you need to do it three times

>Absolutely yes.

It's not divinely inspired so no. You can use it as a reference to what some people believed back then, but is nowhere near the level of scripture

>Sola scriptura, on the other hand, is a Protestant heresy.

Mark 7

1 Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.

2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.

4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.

>5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?

6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

>7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

>8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

>9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:

11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.

12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

>13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4d6887  No.834294

bump

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

359947  No.834405

I wonder why there is such importance placed on the Didache (a product of early Asia Minor churches), but the other old traditions known in Asia Minor were threatened to the point of excommunication? Polycarp, a direct disciple of John, and his followers, were known to celebrate Passover (and Christ's resurrection) during the traditional Jewish dates (quartodecimanism), and even publicly disputed the bishop of Rome about it (his debate with Anicetus). If anyone actually had the "teaching of the Apostles" it was this man: He said he learned this directly from John and other apostles. They finally agreed to disagree, but by the time Polycarp was gone, Asia Minor was in more in danger without him to defend them, and the churches were attacked again. One of his successors, Polycrates, said this:

"We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away. For in Asia also great lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again on the day of the Lord's coming … All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven."

But the Bishop of Rome responded:

"Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, with the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there wholly excommunicate."

He was finally persuaded to reverse this lunacy (by none other than Irenaeus apparently), but it shows how little "tradition" actually matters. People just pick and choose what they like. Especially Catholics and Orthodox. They care nothing about tradition. If they did, Polycarp's churches wouldn't have died off. And worse yet, all of the Jewish churches of Palestine that were similar wouldn't have disappeared as well. These were the people with actual Apostolic tradition.

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

aaa377  No.834444

>>833755

Yes. /thread

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.

4d6887  No.834452

>>834444

>should it be by A or by B

>yes

?

also you can't /thread yourself

also nice quads

Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.



[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Random][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / random / erp / fast / hydrus / kind / lewd / mai / pdfs / tech ]