DaveW

I gotta say..... Of all the things mentioned in my critique of the original post, there is not one answer, not one objection, not one disputed point - except that the person has taken offense at my use of the word stupid - which as I said was not directed at the person but at the proposition. Seems to me that the person was seeking for something to be offended at.... I did after all clearly display how the proposition was indeed a stupid one. Oh well...…...

I didn't call you stupid, I said your proposition was stupid.

I didn't post in this thread until now because I was not interested in the straw man proposition at the very start. I finally stuck my nose in when the OP proposed a clearly unbiblical form of baptism, but now that my nose is "in here" I am going to waggle it around a little. The original post is so full of false premise that it simply isn't funny. Who cares what the Gospel Coalition says (whoever they are...)? I know from my own experience that when I was saved 30+ years ago, and then a few month later baptised, people were already having the discussions about children with false professions "getting saved" again as an adult. I will note to you that the discussion was NEVER about those people getting baptised at a young age, but about whether or not they got saved at that age. I have spoken to many people older than I who made a profession of faith for salvation at ages as young as three, but mostly around the ages of 6-10, who then doubted their salvation and later "tried again". That means that this "trend" you propose has been stable for at least the last 50 or more years. I gotta say that I have never heard this in an IFB church - about salvation yes, but not about baptisms, and the way you word this appears to be suggesting that baptism is a part of salvation...…. Maybe that is simply sloppy wording on your part, but that is the way it looks...... So what? What has this to do with "emotional maturity"? It is about understanding your position as a sinner, and understanding the offer of salvation through Christ. It is not about emotional anything...... This is utter stupidity. The difference between baptism in a catholic church and baptism in an Independent Baptist Church is nothing to do with age, and everything to do with doctrine. Catholics baptise as a part of their salvation ritual process, IFB baptise as a testimony of what the Lord HAS ALREADY done in a saved person's life. You either have ZERO understanding of what baptism means or...…. no that's it...…. And your proposal means that the position of an IFB church would have to change with every baptism. A couple of baptisms ago, our church baptised two 13 year old, a 14 year old, and a 73 year old. Do we average them to find out how close to a Catholic church we are? So we were 28.25 years away from being a Catholic church. But the last baptism was a mother of about 38. So now we are 38 years away from being Catholic? See, it is a stupid proposition..... Who cares what Presbyterians do? But here again you display a lack of understanding about baptism. It takes very little Bible research to see that the order is set out in a plain way - salvation then baptism. Find one instance of a man in the Bible being baptised before being saved..... (I assume Judas was baptised but he never was saved......so he doesn't count.) And yes it is worse than baptising a ten year old, because in every IFB church that I have ever been associated with, the ten year old would only be baptised AFTER he has professed Christ as his Saviour. No baby who cannot even speak the words, is of sufficient understanding to be able to be saved. So in short, your proposition of a trend towards baptising younger is not true over the last 50+ years anyway, so your beginning premise is wrong. Your attempt to associate baptism with "emotional maturity" is simply unbiblical. You appear to be associating baptism to salvation in an essential way, which is unbiblical. Your attempt to make the difference between Catholicism and Baptist churches into one of "age of baptism" is ridiculous, unbiblical, and quite frankly, stupid. And your attempt to minimise the "process" difference between the Presbyterians and the IFB indicates that your purpose here is not just for a good discussion, but to gently spread dissent and false teaching.

Romans 6 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. 5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Likeness of his death....... Don't ya hate it when the Bible disagrees with you?

There is ABSOLUTELY no biblical instruction nor example of this. How does this show the death of Christ?

And Pomegranate juice from the streetside stalls is mmmmmmmmmmmmwonderfuuuuullllllmmmmmmmmm. Cut, squeezed, and served over ice - as fresh as it comes, and so refreshing..... - although I think at that time it might still be a little chilly there.... And the streetside coffee is yum if you like it strong, but if you have never had Arabic (or Turkish coffee - not quite the same - different spices, but similar...consistency...), just a warning - the last half inch is not meant to be drunk.

Oh...… I forgot.... Whilst in Jerusalem, if you have spare time, you MUST MUST MUST go to Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum. The whole complex is astounding, the main museum walk is exhausting - not because of the length - it is not all that long, but the subject matter is so well presented, but so hard to endure - and I already knew about much of it. But to be confronted in the way they do there is...…. essential. When you exit the museum section you come out into a lovely serene view over a valley, and a beautiful cool breeze blowing across you - just what is needed to reflect for a while. But the gardens, the children's walk.... all worthwhile. Each "flame" in the darkness represents a child taken in the Holocaust, and names are spoken continually of those children.

If it is not part of the tour, the Garden Tomb is worth the time. But if it is anything like the trip I took, the hotel room with eyes closed will be the best place. So tuckered by the end of the trip......... Tel Aviv - it depends where you are staying - we were close to the sea and a cafe strip and shopping area. Stood and watched the sea a while and had a lovely cafe meal. You will enjoy yourself.

They are a Catholic order - since the catholic 'church's has rarely been the 'loser' and you are talking about a catholic order, their history should be relatively accurate. By definition, someone named Benedict was the organiser......

Hey guys, what about the guy I quoted from another thread who is clearly outlining a non sola-scriptura guidance? Anyone got a comment?

Why has this been posted in a totally unrelated thread ? (Fasting was the OP....) For the record, I doubt that anyone on here would even try to defend the sinful actions of wicked men, but you have presented no scripture to back up your accusation that this is directly related to "Once saved always saved". However, eternal security IS a Bible doctrine - NOT Calvin's way, but the Bible way. The many names you mention in your post are criticised by many on here whenever their names are put forward, because they are hateful AND unscriptural in many of their teachings and actions. This is why your connecting of eternal life to this sort of sin is unbiblical: Rom 5:20-6:2 (20) Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: (21) That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. (1) What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? (2) God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? No truly saved person WANTS to live in sin. I will finally note to you that God is the one who determined the terms "eternal life" and "everlasting life", and anyone who wants to teach that a saved man can lose his salvation must first overcome the actual terms that God determined should be used - How can eternal life be eternal if it can end? How can everlasting life be everlasting if it is can end? If it ends it NEVER was eternal or everlasting. None of that justifies the kind of sin you are talking about by the way.

Hey Weary and NoNics, some bloke on here posted this in another thread, which is relevant to this subject also: (It was here: https://onlinebaptist.com/forums/topic/27985-why-large-families/?do=findComment&comment=447673")

Not at all suggesting that this isn't happening, but I have never had a real problem with windows versions and updates. My systems have always just worked - only problems I have had are old systems getting junked up with updates (slowing down), and attacks from scammers. But it was pointed out to me that if you type 4x4 whilst holding down the shift key you get $×$, and that CAN'T be a co-incidence!

No...... no it doesn't say that. It says this: Rom 14:20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.

Not at all - I thought it might be helpful to give some explanation.