Comments on: Infant Baptism: Commanded, Forbidden, or Neither? https://reformedforum.org/infant-baptism-commanded-forbidden-or-neither/ Reformed Theological Resources Thu, 21 Apr 2022 20:50:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.1 By: JR https://reformedforum.org/infant-baptism-commanded-forbidden-or-neither/#comment-3484701 Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:27:50 +0000 http://www.ancientreformed.org/?p=117#comment-3484701 But simply agreeing that anything that can be “deduced from scripture by good and necessary consequence” should be binding is not the same thing as proving something is “deduced from scripture by good and necessary consequence”. Will you write a follow up post that show whether it is true? Thanks!

]]>
By: Dave https://reformedforum.org/infant-baptism-commanded-forbidden-or-neither/#comment-3484700 Sun, 27 Mar 2016 20:43:00 +0000 http://www.ancientreformed.org/?p=117#comment-3484700 In reply to Neo.

1) Can you show one, uncontested, immersion in the Bible which is called a “baptism”? In other words, the mode must be immersion and it cannot be reasonably and exegetically read another way, particularly once one compares Scripture with Scripture. 2) Are you aware of the numerous “sprinkling” and/or “pouring” “baptisms” throughout the Bible? In other words, these cannot be read in any other was as to mode of baptism than that these baptism were done by sprinkling and/or pouring. And, 3), How do you read the 4 “baptisms” (actually identified as such) of the children of believers that are cited in the NT (e.g. Acts 2:16-21; 1 Corinthians 10:1-4; Col. 2:11-12 w/ 3:20; 1 Pet. 3:20-21) which make no mention of the children having repented? These passages seem very consistent with how God dealt with and viewed the children of His people in the OT (e.g. Gen. 17:9-10) and with how He still views them today (e.g. Lk. 10:21; 18:15-17; Acts 2:39; 16:14-15; 30-34; 1 Cor. 7:14; etc.)

]]>
By: Dave https://reformedforum.org/infant-baptism-commanded-forbidden-or-neither/#comment-3484699 Sat, 26 Mar 2016 23:10:23 +0000 http://www.ancientreformed.org/?p=117#comment-3484699 In reply to Ralph W Davis.

How would you read Matthew 28:20? Does the Church also have the right to teach its people to observe things that Christ hasn’t commanded?

]]>
By: Ralph W Davis https://reformedforum.org/infant-baptism-commanded-forbidden-or-neither/#comment-3484698 Tue, 22 Mar 2016 04:01:48 +0000 http://www.ancientreformed.org/?p=117#comment-3484698 I would apply the regulative principle to the regulative principle. Show me a general New Testament, or Old Testament, command that says whatever is not commanded is forbidden, and I will accept the Puritan regulative principle. Otherwise…using the regulative principle, I can’t accept it….

]]>
By: Neo https://reformedforum.org/infant-baptism-commanded-forbidden-or-neither/#comment-3484697 Mon, 21 Mar 2016 18:39:08 +0000 http://www.ancientreformed.org/?p=117#comment-3484697 The regulative principle is a wonderful thing. And the pages of Scripture are clear when it gives NO WARRANT for the sprinkling of water on the head’s of unrepentant babies.

]]>