In reply to AGC
Yes. We need to recognize the "ordinary" means of grace vs the 'inordinary."
That is to say, if someone is a new Christian, and wants to be be baptized. On the way to be baptized, this he's in a car accident and dies. NOBODY is saying this person is condemned to hell for not being baptized. This person desired to follow Christ and was a believer.
However, that is different than someone saying they are a Christian, reads they should be baptized, knows he should be baptized, but actively refuses to follow God's Word.
But honestly, it's a pretty novel concept to argue that Paul, Peter, Jesus are not talking about baptism by water.
The biggest arguments in Church history, are not about baptism, everybody as far as I can tell fully accepted that. The real question is the timing of the baptism, with most Church Fathers supportive of infant baptism, but some contingent, of which we know Tertullian was one, preferred an "end of life" baptism to wash away sin before death.
AGC said:FIDO95 said:
So as a consequence an unborn child, who had a soul since the time of conception, is denied salvation if they die in the womb? It is either true 100% of the time that a water baptism is required or there are exceptions? If you do not believe the unborn are damned, for where do you get your source for those exceptions?
I think we can distinguish between God's commands (for us to follow) and God's desire to provide systematic theology. We baptize because it's what we're told to do (and in my tradition, a sacrament and not a symbol, so meaningful). It doesn't preclude God's providence or mercy.
Yes. We need to recognize the "ordinary" means of grace vs the 'inordinary."
That is to say, if someone is a new Christian, and wants to be be baptized. On the way to be baptized, this he's in a car accident and dies. NOBODY is saying this person is condemned to hell for not being baptized. This person desired to follow Christ and was a believer.
However, that is different than someone saying they are a Christian, reads they should be baptized, knows he should be baptized, but actively refuses to follow God's Word.
But honestly, it's a pretty novel concept to argue that Paul, Peter, Jesus are not talking about baptism by water.
The biggest arguments in Church history, are not about baptism, everybody as far as I can tell fully accepted that. The real question is the timing of the baptism, with most Church Fathers supportive of infant baptism, but some contingent, of which we know Tertullian was one, preferred an "end of life" baptism to wash away sin before death.