Hm, I see your point as consistent with your overall take on things, but I don’t see it as inconsistent with mine.(It doesn’t relate to my previous questions in a way that is clear or obvious to me, but maybe it wasn’t intended to, or maybe it’s deeper under the surface than I can see.)

I’ll give it a rest for now while I try to understand your thinking more.

Blessings in Christ,
Doug Roorda

Most of my arguments for credo-baptism come from the Old Testament. But I’m not using the Old Testament to justify a practice that’s not in the new. Peter’s “every one of you” applies to his audience of “men and brethren.” We know from other verses that women, too, were baptized. We also know that baptism always followed repentance.

The promise was for those men and their children: one generation. Jesus told the women they should weep for their children: one generation. The Covenant blessings and curses were enacted gradually upon that one generation until Judah was no more. As many as God called were saved. Then the call to Jews (as Jews) was over.

One thought – if “appealing to the Old Testament over the New for evidence of infant baptism is a bit desperate” shouldn’t you send that complaint to Paul? Seems like he’s pretty comfortable applying the individual baptism to everyone, and saying it’s the same for the Corinthians.

One would be tempted to say “but Paul isn’t really talking about baptism” (anyway I was, in a spirit of bonhomie and whatnot) – but that wouldn’t be right; he is talking about baptism.

More later perhaps. In the meantime, keep up the good work!

Blessings in Christ,
Doug Roorda

Two Dougs replied. Two witnesses.
There’s a couple of pages towards the end where I apply the matrix pattern to baptism. But I don’t think it will make total sense without having read most of the book, especially the parts on Acts and Revelation.

To understand my basic biblical theological reasoning, here’s a good place to start: (some links):
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/07/12/comparing-apples-with-apples/

There are also some extra BT thoughts here:
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/09/28/protesting-the-draft/
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/07/29/healing-in-his-tassels/
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/09/25/the-acid-test/
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2009/11/23/wrath-of-the-waters/
http://www.bullartistry.com.au/wp/2010/01/12/baptism-of-fire/

Maybe I should put a book together to get all this stuff in one place. Might make it an easier target, too!

I could be wrong, but even if I am, these are certainly questions that require some answers. If I am wrong, discussion will only sharpen our understanding of the truth.

Regarding Calvin’s statement, I agree wholeheartedly. But surely this views the church more in the way Rome does, an institution wholly governed by men, rather than a body being built by the Spirit? Each local body pictures, and is a part of, the whole. But each local body, including Rome despite her protests, is not the whole.

Yes, the head and the body go through the pattern. But the head is the head and the body is the body. The head approaches the throne and the theme is blood. When Christ ascended as the firstfruits lamb, the bloodline of Abraham was ended. The Messianic line became entirely Spirit. When the firstfruits church approached the throne, the theme was water, the crystal sea. Although we find blood and water in both head and body, because each approach follows the pattern, in the greater picture, it is the bloody head and the baptized body. Hope this makes sense. It is multi-layered which makes things a little tricky. More tricky than Russian dolls. I could be wrong, but as far as I can tell I am following the same logic as elsewhere. Happy to discuss anything, of course.

Thanks for posting, Doug.

I love friendly nuh-uhs! and a good debate.

My point was that in the Covenant people of the Old Testament, not every individual bore the Covenant sign. So it is with the New. Appealing to the Old Testament over the New for evidence of infant baptism is a bit desperate. There is a gent in Britain who finds evidence for it in Jeremiah, but I will tackle that in another post.

Cheers,
Mike