Chit-Chat


Reply to topic

Search

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

I see!

:)

I think we BOTH believe that little infants are saved and safe, but I think (?) we both believe it for different reasons and in a different way.

:)

It is very, very fascinating and enlightening that Jesus said we needed faith as a child. When He came to earth, He upended the typical pattern that had been known prior, i.e. to be first -- one must be last; someone who gives two tiny coins has given more than others who have tossed in gold, etc.

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

Quote: "Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith..."

I will just make the distinction that "paidion" does not equal infant.

It is used for children of varying ages in the Bible, and depending on the context, can indicate a child up to 12 years old.

For example, Mark 5:39-42: And entering in, He said to them, “Why make a commotion and weep? The child (paidion) has not died, but is asleep... Immediately the girl got up and began to walk, for she was twelve years old.”

These Greek definitions are not really the necessary part of this discussion.

What counts to me is this: Is there even one approved example in the word of God of an infant being baptized? If not, then I do not believe it should be done. If we are supposed to baptize infants, I believe there would be one approved example of this in the Bible.

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

mommy4jesus,

I am glad you see what I am saying.

I am glad we agree and I trust you when we say that we have different reasons why.

I am sorry for attempting to have discussion on deep things in this imperfect medium.

I learn much from every one here and delight in the conversations and also delight when Iron can sharpen Iron here.





Mamana, it does mean infant too!, it means "little one, infant, nursing child" The comma is important here, it doesn't mean that all the children were over twelve years of age.

Strong's biases, meaning his own personal beliefs limit the words he offers to define words.

Not that you are using Stongs, but most places do. So this impacts the materials you read.





When you are looking to disprove what the church has believed for two thousand years, (with the exception of some who for 500 years said that that was wrong.) The onus is on you to prove where the Bible concretely says this is not for little children.



When you look at the story of the Jailer, you have to ignore that families in those days contained grandparents, aunts and uncles and all their children too and that the servants and their families were included as well, It was not the norm of the day to have a little family of parents and only their children considered family.

It is reading into scripture when they say that their were no children there,

That is a big thing to say and is contradicted by how families lived and defined themselves in those days.

It would have been typical that their would have been many children there, yet the verse doesn't say that they were excluded.

What verse clearly excludes kids?



Our God adopted Jewish boys into his family when they were 8days old, did he not love the Jewish girls too?

Does he not love your children too?

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

The 8 day old girls didn't get circumcised, yet were just as spiritually secure as the boys.

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

I am sorry for attempting to have discussion on deep things in this imperfect medium.



^^^


Awww, no apologies needed.
:)

Folks all around the globe have all manner of deep discussions on this imperfect medium. It may be imperfect, but something's better than nothing, right?

:)

If folks hang around and keep talking through things, well, they may never agree, but they'll at least understand one another's point of view. So that's something, at least!

And the conversation and getting to know others is nice.

:)

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

"What verse clearly excludes kids?"

Philip was preaching to the city of Samaria in which it is reasonable to assume there were likely infants in the city (but not necessarily in one particular household).

Acts 8:12: But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, **both men and women**.

re: re: re: re: Wooops I gave you the wrong Bible verse...it was Mark 10 vs 15 that speaks of infant faith...

Sorry I missed this,

God is very good at making clear what is FORBIDDEN, and with that said the verse you gave doesn't really express that.

What I meant to say was "show me verse that says clearly that it is forbidden."


Our loving God adopted into his family Jewish boys at 8 days old. Our loving God loves your babies too. He is a God of patterns and is consistent.



Ever notice how circumcision was done to boys in the old testament, but girls were not told that they would perish, no they too were recipients of the Promises of God. They too received God's grace!

This post was edited on Nov 20, 2017 12:53 PM

12

Reply to topic

Search


Return to Chit-Chat