|
|
Post by knuckle on Aug 9, 2008 18:59:12 GMT -5
Hi Cepha-----------------
In which instance? oikeios speaks of servitude Eph 2:19 oikos speaks of a dwelling 1 Cor 1:16 therapeia speaks of medical patients and domestics Luk 12:42 oikia speaks of the residence Php 4:22
But when I read the word household it means every one living with whomever,be it relatives or servants
That said if you are going to quote the accounts of the Phillippian jailer or Cornelius or Lydia or Stephen then quote the whole account and we will look at it
much love---------knuckle
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 19:16:24 GMT -5
But when I read the word household it means every one living with whomever,be it relatives or servants much love---------knuckle You believe that the word household means "every one living with whomever, be it relatives or servants." By saying "everyone", you don't exclude infants. Therefore, whenever The Bible says that a household is baptized, infants & children are not excluded. You would have to believe that whenever a household was baptized in The Bible, it never ever had infants or children as part "of" that household to believe that infants and children being bapitzed is "not" Biblical. Am I accurate to say that this is what you believe? That baptized households in The Bible never had infants or children in them? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 19:41:52 GMT -5
And Knucks, was your answer "No." to this question I asked you?
(I couldn't tell because you didn't quote me, so I have to ask.)
"That baptized households in The Bible never had infants or children in them?"
|
|
|
|
Post by knuckle on Aug 9, 2008 19:46:17 GMT -5
Cepha---------
the ones baptized were not infants.
much love---------knuckle
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 19:50:19 GMT -5
I ask you again, "Is that "in" The Bible?"
Yes or no.
And if Yes, scripture please.
(infants and children not being condemned to eternal damnation if they don't believe)
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 19:54:09 GMT -5
Cepha--------- the ones baptized were not infants. much love---------knuckle Knuckles, It's really a simple question. A yes or no would more than suffice because I can't even begin to have an open discussion with you on the matter until I know what you believe. I have to pin down what you believe a household is and so far, you've given me two different understandings and now I'm confused. Question: Do you believe that households excluded children & infants? Yes or no? (Yes, I remember when you said that you believe it includes every relative "in" the house, but you exclude children & infants from households that were baptized...I just want to be sure that I'm correct in believing that you believe that while households include all living relatives of the home, it does "not" include infants & children when talking about baptized households.) |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 22:27:00 GMT -5
I ask you again, "Is that "in" The Bible?" Yes or no. And if Yes, scripture please. (infants and children not being condemned to eternal damnation if they don't believe) Jesus says the blind are sinless, did He not? Even if I use your owns words to say what you have previously said, you will disagree with yourself, crazy!!!! Again...simple question. "Is that "in" The Bible?" Yes or no. And if Yes, scripture please. (infants and children not being condemned to eternal damnation if they don't believe) |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 22:28:03 GMT -5
Jesus soundly condemned the Pharisees for claiming to be able to see. Why does Jesus say that the blind are truly sinless. Why? Because Adam & Eve too were blind and when they were, God blessed them. But when their eyes were opened, God condemned them. Same analogy. These are your words right? If you do not believe this then why did you say them. If you do believe your own words, then you agree that God will not condemn infants. I will answer your question when you answer mine. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 22:57:48 GMT -5
Romans 10:9
"That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."
1. Ok, but is it in The Bible that "God will not condemn infants" who "don't" accept Jesus?
Simple question.
Biblical?
Or not?
According to you, if one doesn't accept Christ as their pesonal Lord & Savior, they will be sent to hell, but haven't provided one scripture to support this belief that infants and children won't.
I'm just trying to see if not all of your beliefs are "Biblical".
If you believe you can add doctrine to Christianity that simply doesn't exist.
2. And oh yes, another question I asked you...what does the word "household" mean to you when it's used in The Bible?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 9, 2008 23:12:41 GMT -5
Watchman,
Correct me if I'm wrong to believe this, but you believe that even though it's "not" in The Bible, God makes exceptions for infants and children.
This to me means that you believe in something as a Christian with regards to Christianity that is "not" Biblical.
Right?
Who exactly makes the exception here if it's not in The Bible?
You or God?
|
|
|
|
Post by knuckle on Aug 10, 2008 7:04:47 GMT -5
sin offering fulfilled by Christ see Lev. 4 and 5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 10, 2008 9:45:26 GMT -5
sin offering fulfilled by Christ see Lev. 4 and 5 Do you believe that households excluded children & infants with regards to "baptized" households? Yes or no? |
|
|
|
Post by knuckle on Aug 10, 2008 12:17:05 GMT -5
Cepha-------------------
I told you what I took household to mean,you quoted me.
are infants part of a household------yes
were infants in the group baptized--------no
how do we know---------because of the description given of those as hearing and believing
does the bible forbid infant baptism---no but the prerequisite would still be hearing and believing
is infant baptism needed to save a child from hell------no Christ fulfilled the sin offering and they are covered
much love---------------knuckle
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 10, 2008 12:58:57 GMT -5
Cepha------------------- I told you what I took household to mean,you quoted me. are infants part of a household------yes were infants in the group baptized--------no Then, the Bible should never have said "households" because that description is disingenuous. It lied when it said that "households" were baptized. To use the word "household" is a misrepresentation of the truth. Now, the Bible never actually "says" that infants and children were excluded, but I guess we are all allowed to take what we want from scripture. I for one will take "household"'s meaning to hold true. I believe that when The Bible says a "household" was baptized, it meant exactly that...every living relative in the residence was literally baptized from the youngest to the oldest. I will accept that without looking for any way to exclude children & infants from this gift. I can honestly say that my belief is 100% Biblical and not conjecture based solely on the text of The Bible. And basically, this is the way it's always been...since The Primitive Church: What The First Christians Believed: Origen"according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants"
(Holilies on Leviticus, 8:3:11 [A.D. 244]). The Council of Carthage 253 condemned the opinion that baptism should be withheld from infants until the eighth day after birth. Augustine "The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned . . . nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic"
(Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]). You asked me to show you one scripture where hearing and believing was mentioned as a requisite before one was baptized I believe as if this was proof that no baptism ever took place without a literal profession of faith or belief or that the person was literally told that they had to believe? Do you remember me showing it to you? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 10, 2008 13:34:29 GMT -5
If the sins of the father are passed on to their children, then is it not true that the blessings of the father are passed on to their children?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 10, 2008 13:37:05 GMT -5
What have Christians believed for almost 2,000 years?
=================================================================
Irenaeus
"He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age" (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).
"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).
Hippolytus
"Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them" (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D. 215]).
Origen
"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).
"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).
Cyprian of Carthage
"As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).
"If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another" (ibid., 64:5).
Gregory of Nazianz
"Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7 [A.D. 388]).
"‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly , if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28).
John Chrysostom
"You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members" (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]).
Augustine
"What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).
"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).
"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).
"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).
Council of Carthage V
"Item: It seemed good that whenever there were not found reliable witnesses who could testify that without any doubt they [abandoned children] were baptized and when the children themselves were not, on account of their tender age, able to answer concerning the giving of the sacraments to them, all such children should be baptized without scruple, lest a hesitation should deprive them of the cleansing of the sacraments. This was urged by the [North African] legates, our brethren, since they redeem many such [abandoned children] from the barbarians" (Canon 7 [A.D. 401]).
Council of Mileum II
"[W]hoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration" (Canon 3 [A.D. 416]).
|
|
|
|
Post by knuckle on Aug 10, 2008 13:37:57 GMT -5
Hi Cepha------------------
whoa up,just because a household includes children then automatically their household had children too?
there are no infants in my household my kids (the two still at home) are grown
being girls when(or if) they get married they will leave mom and dad,cleave to their husbands and start their own household just as their sisters did
but to base infant baptism on the fact that the word household was used in spite of how the folks are described is a far leap to make
much love----------------knuckle
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 10, 2008 13:45:39 GMT -5
Hi Cepha------------------ whoa up,just because a household includes children then automatically their household had children too? If the Bible says "household" and doesn't exclude infants and children specifically, then it cannot be believed that when it says that a household was baptized, children and infants were automatically excluded. This is an "unbiblical' belief that never existed until just recently in Christian history as it was introduced by Anti-Catholic sects. No where in The Bible is it taught that we are to exclude children & infants from baptism and history clearly shows how infants & children have always been baptized. Again, one would have to believe that whenever a household was baptized, there were no children "in" the household (even though the Bible doesn't ever say this). In other words, to believe something just because it's in the Bible is a far leap to make for you. It's literally in the Bible. Household includes children & infants. Households were baptized. The Bible never excluded children & infants. Period. Only Denoniminational Christians exclude their infants & children from Baptism. But the overwhelming majority of Christians do baptize their children and infants...or in Biblical speak, their households. |
|
|
|
Post by knuckle on Aug 10, 2008 13:53:28 GMT -5
Cepha---------------
the bible is clear describing these folks as "hearing" and "Believing" the word hear is akouo it denotes an understanding of meaning you have read Acts Bro. you know this
much love-------------------knuckle
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Aug 10, 2008 13:57:08 GMT -5
Cepha--------------- the bible is clear describing these folks as " hearing" and " Believing" the word hear is akouo it denotes an understanding of meaning you have read Acts Bro. you know this much love-------------------knuckle Then children & babies who die go to hell.  |
|
