Baptism and dispensationalism are apples and oranges. Assuming that credo Baptists are all dispnsational is wrong and conflating the two beliefs is false. Believing a particular doctrine doesn't make it true and placing those who fail to adopt such a belief into a neat category is unwise. That is like calling someone that disagrees with you a Not-see. We Baptists are hard to nail down, because we vary greatly and are not in agreement on many issues. Do a deep dive into the broader Baptist movement and you will discover that Baptists are probably the most diverse among the Protestant church.
@duranbailiff5337
8 ай бұрын
If you believe that infant baptism is the Sign and Seal of the Covenant of Grace, why wouldn't God spell that out in one of the 66 books of the Bible? Infant baptism (as well as adult) was not practiced by the Early Church. We know when it started in Church history and it is a vestige of the RCC. Infant baptism cannot be compared to circumcision, because female infants never received it. God spelled out formally the rite of circumcision, but did not lay out infant baptism. Ad fontes. 🙏🏼
@Ephesians-rz7zp
Жыл бұрын
Touché Baptists. But I’m still a Presby. 😝 29 How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? Hebrews 10:29
@Dumbashamedloser
Жыл бұрын
I have no idea what’s right. I didn’t get baptised by emersion until I was 19. I did get baptised for confirmation in a Methodist church at 13 but it wasn’t by emersion, it was just water put on my forehead. 🤷🏻♀️
@caedmonnoeske3931
2 жыл бұрын
Well, Dutch Reformed/Presbyterian here. Hell no to the primacy of the bishop of Rome. The perpetual virginity of the blessed Mother of God? Weeelllll....Calvin believed it. Just sayin'.
@classicchristianliterature
3 жыл бұрын
I laughed every time he said "you pathetic dispensationalist"
@barelyprotestant5365
3 жыл бұрын
The Bible doesn't explicitly mention the allowance of women for Communion. Therefore, the Reformed Bapticostals need to deny Communion to women.
@drleach208
3 жыл бұрын
This is so weak, I am embarrassed for you even saying it....
@barelyprotestant5365
3 жыл бұрын
@@drleach208 explain why.
@ac-ir9gs
4 жыл бұрын
You're wearing a cowboy hat. You're clearly a dispensationalist.
@akimoetam1282
4 жыл бұрын
Baptist can deny the covenant to their children all they want. But it’s a well known fact that evangelical credo Baptist’s are the biggest bullies on the block and will force their kids to be baptized or they will personally throw them into hell.
@akimoetam1282
4 жыл бұрын
Credobaptism is the illusion of choice
@mycull
5 жыл бұрын
Why do they have the same voice?
@justinpalmer3948
5 жыл бұрын
Bahahaha I love how the Presbyterian looks like R.C. Sproul and the Baptist has a cowboy hat looking like he’s from TX😂
@jamesbohn9659
5 жыл бұрын
All the talk of the signs and seals of the covenant... Ephesians 1:13-14 “In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,” Ephesians 1:13 ESV. This is very direct. The seal of the covenant isn’t even baptism, it’s the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and it’s even prefaced by the hearing and then believing of the gospel.
@johnrose5958
6 жыл бұрын
the baptism is for infant believers! you must be born again!
@RyanGill86
2 жыл бұрын
Amen! "Those *in Christ* are Abraham's offspring -- heirs according to the promise!"
@JMXLloyd
6 жыл бұрын
One true church = Catholic church. Who gathered the books of the bible again ?
@TheFluteNewb
6 жыл бұрын
Justin Lloyd the Roman Catholic Church and the church Catholic are not the same. The first is a heretical denomination and the second is the union of all true believers despite denominational differences.
@revbray
6 жыл бұрын
It was not the Roman Catholic Church.
@Solideogloria00
5 жыл бұрын
you are.misinformed. The Roman Church didn't even exist back then. No one in the council of Nicea 325 belived what Rome teaches today. No pope, no Mary dogmas, purgatory, etc. May God open your heart and eyes. :)
@trystyn1105
5 жыл бұрын
They only confirmed what was already being done. No one group has ever had control of the Bible in the same way the cults have had control of their books. God uses people, so Glory be to God. Not the "Roman Catholic Church"
@duranbailiff5337
8 ай бұрын
The Bible is clear and history bears the truth that God gave the Oracles to and through Israel. The Jews wrote, collected, and preserved the Word of God. God promises to preserve His Word and He did that through Israel. The RCC came much later and did not have a hand in work that predates their existence. We must also remember that Christianity began in Israel- Not Rome. 🙏🏼
@athanakop7775
7 жыл бұрын
I am Presbyterian . Just saying
@xceptamanbbornagainnokingd5836
7 жыл бұрын
just because one was circumcised, didn't mean they were saved. many Jews went to hell. same with baptism. it's an act of faith, on the baptizy's part, not the baptizer's if the baby gets baptized only to grow up to be a true infidel, then the infant baptism was all in vain
@lizvett1978
5 жыл бұрын
XceptAManBbornAgain NoKingdomOfGod 😊😊😊😊
@michaelcaza-schonberger9282
10 жыл бұрын
Great video! Here's some more points for infant sprinklers to consider. No better than Catholics! Baptism is based on ones personal desire to follow Messiah, infant baptism is unBiblical. We read in Scripture that a believers baptism is mandated, not an infant/child baptism. This is not right! Baby dedications are a good thing, but not baptism. We're Protestants for a reason, we want to live according to the word, not the traditions and doctrines of man. Baptism is to be full immersion, not a sprinkling.
@michaelcaza-schonberger9282
9 жыл бұрын
Cesar Morales pagan Catholicism isn't what the apostles, nor Yeshua taught in Scripture, especially when it comes to infant sprinkling, purgatory, Mary queen of Heaven and ever virgin, and cannibalism. Don't start stuff, unless you've studied.
@michaelcaza-schonberger9282
9 жыл бұрын
Cesar Morales while I agree with you to a point in regards to how some churches operate and such as those in the Anglican Communion (church of England, Episcopal, and Anglican churches), I still think there's some validity to them if they refined a bit more from catholic/orthodox tradition. I'm Jewish I have a healthy respect and love for tradition, but if the tradition is not in line with Scripture or if it takes away from Scripture the tradition should be stopped so that Scripture has final say. I would use this argument for Presbyterian's, Lutheran's, Anglican's who hold to the tradition of infant Baptism and then confirm those children at a later age. Actually it's interesting read what some of the articles of religion (Anglican Communion) states: XXV. Of the Sacraments. Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses,and effectual signs of grace, and God’s good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him. There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Those five commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and extreme Unction, are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel, being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles, partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures; but yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper, for that they have not any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God. The Sacraments were not ordained of Christ to be gazed upon, or to be carried about, but that we should duly use them. And in such only as worthily receive the same they have a wholesome effect or operation: but they that receive them unworthily purchase to themselves damnation, as Saint Paul saith. XXXIV. Of the Traditions of the Church It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, and utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’ s Word. Whosoever through his private judgement, willingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren. Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things be done to edifying. It would do the Anglican Communion a world of good to go back to what it instituted at it's conception and rely on the word of G-d for it's operation. While I have nothing against liturgy (it's very beautiful if done in a proper way), I do have issues with infant baptism and confirmation (as the articles state there are only two ordinances (sacraments), baptism and holy communion). I would love to see the tradition of the High Church meld beautifully with Scriptural orthodoxy. Where we have a a group using liturgical tradition, but that did believers baptism (that which we in the Evangelical arm of the church practise), and were heavily Bible based as opposed to being what the church (for the most part) is today). I truly think this is what churches in the ANIC are trying to be, except they still need to move away from baby sprinkling and confirming (but I am commenting as a an outsider, I'm a Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada seminarian not an Anglican, I just have a healthy love and respect for Anglican patrimony). They broke away when the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church in the U.S. started to get to liberal. In regards to Scripture cannon, I'll leave this for another time. no debates here as you're right it's silly, but open dialogue among Christians is nice.
@michaelcaza-schonberger9282
9 жыл бұрын
Cesar Morales have a great Sunday.
@chaddisrud535
6 жыл бұрын
The Bible does not mention baby dedications and does not mandate full immersion any more than the word bathing means to go under water in a bath tub only and not a shower. Such things are new age traditions and doctrines of man. The meaning you and your church have created in your Baptism is that it is an act after declaring a mature personal desire to be Christian. That meaning is not described in the Bible as the meaning of Baptism is not given in the Bible. We read in the original text that Baptism is mandated to be performed on all who are under the authority of a Christian in their religious upbringing, not specifically a believers Baptism. We are also ordered by Christ in the Great Commission to first Baptize, then teach so that they may then become Christian. To deny that is at best to be ignorant of what the vast majority of Biblical scholars and expert in ancient language agree is the meaning of the original Scripture.
@koldfront85
10 жыл бұрын
If baptism and circumcision are identical in Col 2:11, and circumcision is described as "without hands" (spiritual) then why do we still consider baptism to be literal H2O? That's where Col 2:14 comes in.
@sukka4pain
4 жыл бұрын
I'm 5 years too late but EXACTLY!!!
@koldfront85
10 жыл бұрын
Colossians 2:14 - Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
@InQuietnessAndTrust
11 жыл бұрын
This. Is. GOLD!!!! Read heaps of debates on puritanboard I must admit, this summarises it completely. Jeremiah 31 is the chief battleground between Reformed Baptists who hold to covenantal theology and Pressies :D "So nothing is new even though God says it is new? Nothing is different even though God says it's not like the one which was broken?" :D
@ReformedTheology5
12 жыл бұрын
This is EXACTLY how the conversation goes! PLEASE print and read "A String of Pearls Unstrung"! All Scriptural objections thoroughly addressed. It is important to remain prayerful, especially open and humble to leading and correction by the Holy Spirit. Remember Christ's example of humility. Beware of spiritual pride and hardening. Whoever thinks he knows everything has nothing to learn. Children keep yourselves from idols. Not man, tradition, experience, thoughts, feelings. Scripture alone!
@mwj9080
6 жыл бұрын
R amen my brother. Humility is key.
@DesertPaladin
12 жыл бұрын
Hilarious! This reminds me of the many discussions I had with my old OPC Pastor. I always left him "ruffled" like this. I noticed the Presby has a DNC button on his lapel - ROFL!
Пікірлер