David Bercot to Speak on Anabaptism in Holmes

[Valerie]

It is interesting. I shared with one of our EO friends who said it was a tape he listened to in 1992 or 1993 that had convinced him of infant baptism. He said David made a pretty compelling case for it and quoted 4 early Church fathers, Polycarp, Iraneus , Hippolytus, & Origen.
This friend has Anabaptists heritage (as does his wife) but it is not line he can go back & pretend he wasn’t convinced by Bercot (& since, his own research) that the early Church indeed baptized their children.

Since Bercot brought up the early Church fathers at his talk, I asked him about Origen stating it as “fact” that the Apostles taught to baptize their children- Origen had his own “ideas” in theology BUT he stated that as FACT that Apistles had taught to baptize infants/children.

His reply to my question caused me to feel he is not convinced it’s wrong but more he has to stick with where he is now.

Huh? He doesn't have to "stick" anywhere.

Infant baptism is obvious nonsense. If we are to baptize infants, we should start baptizing cats, dogs, jackasses, and horses.

I should have said it was David Bercot tape that my friend had that convinced him of infant baptism.

If you don’t understand the reason the Apostles taught Christian parents to baptize their children, then I guess you would see it as nonsense but so is comparing children to cats, dogs, and jackasses.

[Judas Maccabeus]

It is interesting. I shared with one of our EO friends who said it was a tape he listened to in 1992 or 1993 that had convinced him of infant baptism. He said David made a pretty compelling case for it and quoted 4 early Church fathers, Polycarp, Iraneus , Hippolytus, & Origen.
This friend has Anabaptists heritage (as does his wife) but it is not line he can go back & pretend he wasn’t convinced by Bercot (& since, his own research) that the early Church indeed baptized their children.

Since Bercot brought up the early Church fathers at his talk, I asked him about Origen stating it as “fact” that the Apostles taught to baptize their children- Origen had his own “ideas” in theology BUT he stated that as FACT that Apistles had taught to baptize infants/children.

His reply to my question caused me to feel he is not convinced it’s wrong but more he has to stick with where he is now.

Huh? He doesn't have to "stick" anywhere.

Infant baptism is obvious nonsense. If we are to baptize infants, we should start baptizing cats, dogs, jackasses, and horses.

The reference is this:

''“With that it is not written explicitly, do not baptize them, to this I answer, can I also baptize my dog and my donkey … take infants to the Lord’s supper … sell the mass as a sacrifice, for [the Bible] does not prohibit anywhere with explicit words that we do these things? Realize what a nice double potpourri we would set up again if it were acceptable to joggle outside the word of God in those matters which concern God and the souls.”"

Balthasar Hubmaier Marytared 10 March 1528, baptized between 6,000 and 12,000 people with the true baptism of Christ.

[Judas Maccabeus]

It is interesting. I shared with one of our EO friends who said it was a tape he listened to in 1992 or 1993 that had convinced him of infant baptism. He said David made a pretty compelling case for it and quoted 4 early Church fathers, Polycarp, Iraneus , Hippolytus, & Origen.
This friend has Anabaptists heritage (as does his wife) but it is not line he can go back & pretend he wasn’t convinced by Bercot (& since, his own research) that the early Church indeed baptized their children.

Since Bercot brought up the early Church fathers at his talk, I asked him about Origen stating it as “fact” that the Apostles taught to baptize their children- Origen had his own “ideas” in theology BUT he stated that as FACT that Apistles had taught to baptize infants/children.

His reply to my question caused me to feel he is not convinced it’s wrong but more he has to stick with where he is now.

Huh? He doesn't have to "stick" anywhere.

Infant baptism is obvious nonsense. If we are to baptize infants, we should start baptizing cats, dogs, jackasses, and horses.

I should have said it was David Bercot tape that my friend had that convinced him of infant baptism.

If you don’t understand the reason the Apostles taught Christian parents to baptize their children, then I guess you would see it as nonsense but so is comparing children to cats, dogs, and jackasses.

None of the above have faith, none can profess faith in Christ.

Nowhere does the inspired scripture teach infant baptism. As the first of our confessions of faith says:

"" Baptism shall be given to all those who have learned repentance and amendment of life, and who believe truly that their sins are taken away by Christ, and to all those who walk in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and wish to be buried with Him in death, so that they may be resurrected with Him, and to all those who with this significance request it [baptism] of us and demand it for themselves. This excludes all infant baptism, the highest and chief abomination of the pope. ""

""Done at Schleitheim, in the borderlands, St. Matthew's Day, Anno MDXXVII.

It is an abomination because it inspires a false confidence in an act of men without faith.

[ohio jones]

If you don’t understand the reason the Apostles taught Christian parents to baptize their children...

That assertion is contrary to the New Testament record of what the Apostles taught concerning baptism.

[Valerie]

If you don’t understand the reason the Apostles taught Christian parents to baptize their children...

That assertion is contrary to the New Testament record of what the Apostles taught concerning baptism.

Not necessarily. An adult would practice believers baptism for conversion, and their children would be baptized and added to the church- it was Scriptural to compare baptism to circumcision, and the lack of ages listed of whole households being baptized at once s couple of times in Acts is strange to assume a whole household was all adults- surely there were children in the households. But we also know the Apostles did not write everything down, the church was started by Oral and written teachings.

[ken_sylvania]

If you don’t understand the reason the Apostles taught Christian parents to baptize their children...

That assertion is contrary to the New Testament record of what the Apostles taught concerning baptism.

Not necessarily. An adult would practice believers baptism for conversion, and their children would be baptized and added to the church- it was Scriptural to compare baptism to circumcision, and the lack of ages listed of whole households being baptized at once s couple of times in Acts is strange to assume a whole household was all adults- surely there were children in the households. But we also know the Apostles did not write everything down, the church was started by Oral and written teachings.

Are you also of the opinion that the infants in these households believed in God and rejoiced?

It seems much more sensible to accept the more reasonable interpretation - that various references to entire households of people believing and being baptized refers to the adult members and not to the babies.

[Valerie]

That assertion is contrary to the New Testament record of what the Apostles taught concerning baptism.

Not necessarily. An adult would practice believers baptism for conversion, and their children would be baptized and added to the church- it was Scriptural to compare baptism to circumcision, and the lack of ages listed of whole households being baptized at once s couple of times in Acts is strange to assume a whole household was all adults- surely there were children in the households. But we also know the Apostles did not write everything down, the church was started by Oral and written teachings.

Are you also of the opinion that the infants in these households believed in God and rejoiced?

It seems much more sensible to accept the more reasonable interpretation - that various references to entire households of people believing and being baptized refers to the adult members and not to the babies.

Jesus was of that opinion regarding children:

Matthew 18:3

King James Bible
And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 19:

14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

[ken_sylvania]

Not necessarily. An adult would practice believers baptism for conversion, and their children would be baptized and added to the church- it was Scriptural to compare baptism to circumcision, and the lack of ages listed of whole households being baptized at once s couple of times in Acts is strange to assume a whole household was all adults- surely there were children in the households. But we also know the Apostles did not write everything down, the church was started by Oral and written teachings.

Are you also of the opinion that the infants in these households believed in God and rejoiced?

It seems much more sensible to accept the more reasonable interpretation - that various references to entire households of people believing and being baptized refers to the adult members and not to the babies.

Jesus was of that opinion regarding children:

Matthew 18:3

King James Bible
And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 19:

14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

I notice you side-stepped the question. Is it your opinion that there were babies in these households who believed in God and rejoiced?

[Valerie]

Are you also of the opinion that the infants in these households believed in God and rejoiced?

It seems much more sensible to accept the more reasonable interpretation - that various references to entire households of people believing and being baptized refers to the adult members and not to the babies.

Jesus was of that opinion regarding children:

Matthew 18:3

King James Bible
And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 19:

14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

I notice you side-stepped the question. Is it your opinion that there were babies in these households who believed in God and rejoiced?

According to Jesus, they believe, I don’t understand it, but He did- my “natural” mind is challenged. I’d be afraid to assume they were not included.

[Valerie]

Plus Jesus quoted Psalm 8:3:

hear what these are saying?" And Jesus said to them, "Yes; have you never read, "'Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise'