# Info on baptism



## sola_gratia (Aug 11, 2005)

Can anyone direct me to some online resources about credobaptism and paedobaptism? I don't really hold a position because I don't know a lot about either side.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

I don't know, guys . . . do you think anyone here on the Puritanboard would have any opinions/recommendations regarding paedo/credo baptism?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by biblelighthouse_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Scott Bushey (Aug 11, 2005)




----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Scott Bushey_



Gross, but funny!


----------



## blhowes (Aug 11, 2005)

Here's another site to go to when investigating the paedo/credo baptism. Its just my opinion, but I think this particular site favors credo baptism. (jk)

[Edited on 8-11-2005 by blhowes]


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

For one thing, don't make the huge mistake of starting with John the Baptist when you start studying baptism.

Rather, a person should start with Genesis 6-9. Then they should take a look at Exodus 14-15.

I think those 2 passages are very important pieces of a fully Biblical theology of baptism. And they are far, far, far too often ignored by both credos and paedos, In my humble opinion.


----------



## BobVigneault (Aug 11, 2005)

I'm not sure if that topic has ever been discussed here.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> I'm not sure if that topic has ever been discussed here.



Me either. . . . Have we discussed baptism on this board before? . . . let me check the archives . . .




[Edited on 8-11-2005 by biblelighthouse]


----------



## Steve Owen (Aug 11, 2005)

Hello Levi,
Try
http://members.lycos.co.uk/ReformedBaptist/homepage.htm

It belongs to a friend of mine and has some very good stuff. Have a good look at his 'chart' of the covenants.

Martin


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Martin Marprelate_
> Hello Levi,
> Try
> http://members.lycos.co.uk/ReformedBaptist/homepage.htm
> ...



Martin. I love Dan. He is a good guy. I met him through another board. We have traded a few things. He is a very smart good man. I have even talked to him via some AIM thing where you can actually talk like you are on a phone. Be Encouraged, Randy


----------



## raderag (Aug 11, 2005)

Buy this little pamplet/book ($2.50).

It is very helpful in understanding (not proving) the padeo position, and also very practical for even those that don't agree.


Infant Bapitsm (Paperback)
by John P. Sartelle



[Edited on 8-11-2005 by raderag]


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

That is an excellent little pamphlet!


----------



## Poimen (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by raderag_
> Buy this little pamplet/book ($2.50).
> 
> It is very helpful in understanding (not proving) the padeo position, and also very practical for even those that don't agree.
> ...





As a pastor I would highly recommend this book.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Aug 11, 2005)

Here we go. I liked the book. Matt has a response here.

One of the main issues between those who differ on Covenant Theology is whether the New Covenant membership includes only born again members or if it includes unregenerate and regenerate alike.


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 11, 2005)

Levi,

The best stuff from the credobaptist perspective is from Greg Welty.

http://www.founders.org/library/welty.html

The most helpful stuff that I found from the paedobaptist perspective was Matthew Henry's treatise (not online I think) and the William the Baptist material

http://www.mbrem.com/baptism/william.htm


----------



## Poimen (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by joshua_
> {MODERATOR}
> 
> Let's keep this on topic. Start a new thread if you guys wish.



You're right. _Mea culpa_. 

[Edited on 8-11-2005 by poimen]


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 11, 2005)

OK . . . Here are some baptism websites to peruse:

http://www.fivesolas.com/fs_bapt.htm

http://www.issuesetc.org/resource/journals/kastens.htm

http://www.issuesetc.org/resource/journals/shuta.htm

http://thirdmill.org/newfiles/den_johnson/TH.Johnson.Baptism.html


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Aug 11, 2005)

While we're recommending booklets:
Jay Adams, _The Meaning and Mode of Baptism_
short, direct, logical, helpful (from a sprinkling/paedo perspective)
breaks the issue down into basics: what _is_ baptism, why is it to be applied, how, to whom?


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Contra_Mundum_
> While we're recommending booklets:
> Jay Adams, _The Meaning and Mode of Baptism_
> short, direct, logical, helpful (from a sprinkling/paedo perspective)
> breaks the issue down into basics: what _is_ baptism, why is it to be applied, how, to whom?



Gotta admit, I'm not to fond of this booklet. Adams seems to go beyond the Confession, in saying that all modes other than sprinkling are bad.


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 12, 2005)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> 
> Gotta admit, I'm not to fond of this booklet. Adams seems to go beyond the Confession, in saying that all modes other than sprinkling are bad.



I do think affusion is good, and immersion is bad. I don't think they share equal "goodness". (Nevertheless, I would not go so far as to call immersion "invalid", either.) 

Here are some reasons why I think immersion is bad:


*Immersion for God's enemies*

When God redeems His people, He doesn't immerse them, but He immerses their *enemies* in water instead! God did this with both Noah's family and Israel.

As we know, Noah and his family were the only ones on earth who were not immersed in the great flood of Genesis 6. All of God's enemies were immersed in the flood, but God's chosen people were spared. And in the New Testament, 1 Peter 3:20-21 makes a clear tie between baptism and the salvation of Noah. So whatever pictures baptism best, immersion isn't it!

Similarly, when God saved Israel from Egypt, they were not immersed. By a miracle of God, the Israelites crossed the Red Sea on land, and were never immersed. But God's enemies, the Egyptians, were completely immersed, and were killed in the Red Sea. And in the New Testament, 1 Corinthians 10:2 makes a clear tie between baptism and the redemption of Israel. Again, whatever pictures baptism best, immersion isn't it!

More than once, the New Testament makes explicit references to baptism, concerning godly people who were specifically not immersed!

Source: http://www.biblelighthouse.com/sacraments/baptism-mode-immersion.htm


In short, I think immersion in water sends completely the wrong message. In the context of baptism, immersion in water signifies God's wrath and judgment, while affusion signifies the washing of regeneration.

(It's kind of an ironic view for me to hold, considering that I attend a baptistic Bible church, huh?) 




[Edited on 8-12-2005 by biblelighthouse]


----------



## Steve Owen (Aug 12, 2005)

Joseph,
I think the important thing is that when you're baptized, you don't STAY immersed 

Martin


----------



## biblelighthouse (Aug 12, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Martin Marprelate_
> Joseph,
> I think the important thing is that when you're baptized, you don't STAY immersed
> 
> Martin




:bigsmile:  :bigsmile:


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Aug 13, 2005)

Shouldn't we put on Christ like a jacket in baptism (Cf. Gal 3:27) if we are going to picture our being buried with him as well, as immersion apparently signifies?


----------



## Steve Owen (Aug 13, 2005)

*'Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life'* (Rom 6:4 ).

Martin


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Aug 13, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Martin Marprelate_
> *'Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life'* (Rom 6:4 ).
> 
> Martin



That's a great verse, Martin. However, my point is that if we are going to have a "complete" picture of baptism in the mode, we must also put on Christ like a jacket as Gal 3:27 says. Personally, though, I don't see Rom 6 as talking about the act of baptism, but the act of regeneration.


----------



## Steve Owen (Aug 13, 2005)

> Personally, though, I don't see Rom 6 as talking about the act of baptism, but the act of regeneration.



 But baptism by imersion is a representation of the regeneration figured in Rom 6:4.

However, although I've no doubt that imersion was the method practised in the NT, I wouldn't get totally hung up over mode. Repentance and faith are more important, being, I suggest, the true meaning of 'putting on Christ.'

Martin


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 13, 2005)

{MODERATING}

This is an info thread, not a debating thread. There is nothing wrong with discussing this issue and offering interpretations, texts, etc. Just do it in the appropriate thread (one was already split off) or start a new one.

Thanks,

Your friendly neighborhood Admin,


----------

