I definitely needed a good trashing to unwind last friday

If you get too drunk, it's literally always poison.

Oh, spam is delicious.

And yes, excessive alcohol will ruin you. It's also a mortal sin.

This is coming from somebody who has often been shamefully drunk.

we've all been there

Though, alcohol within reason is perfectly fine, if not quite beneficial.

If you are 100% anti-alcohol, you are quite possibly a puritan. And that is very bad.

Baptists.are Muslims
NO ICONS
NO SAINTS
NO ALCOHOL

Trinitarian Muslims

baptists are funny bunch

they don't believe in infant baptism

Baptism is the new circumcsion

yet they are sola scriptura to the extreme

where the scriptures mention infant baptism

Last I checked, no baby ever asked to be circumcised

Or baptized either

consent is for fags

"This promise is for you and your children."

And all the household baptisms

And "children" is "teknon" which means "children," not "descendants"

If Luke wanted to say "descendants," he would have written "sperma"

Joachim Jeremias has the best defense of infant baptism IMO. He wrote two books defending it against Kurt Aland, who argues it didn't start till the late 2nd century (though he thinks we should still do it because he's Presbyterian)

I've come across that argument sometimes, that in the early church baptism was often put off until the person was on his deathbed, so that its justifying power would be like how you wait until after a workout to shower. Constantine was one of those, iirc.
It doesn't square with scriptural descriptions of new converts being baptized immediately, though.

Imagine putting off Baptism and you die unexpectedly. God is going to YEET you straight to Hell for playing politics with Salvation.

exactly

I was talking to a friend about Hell today.

We were discussing how priests don't preach about Hell enough.

It's one of the two places everybody is guaranteed to end up in.

There are a lot of people there already, and a lot of folks who claim to be Catholic will be heading there.

@SirLoin97 It's really a pretty bad argument though for that. Putting off baptism till the deathbed is a late practice from the historical record

"late" as in no evidence before Tertullian really

The best argument against it (from a Sola scriptura premise) is that there isn't an explicit example of it in the Bible or Christian church history until ~200 AD.

But there is tons of implicit evidence in both 2nd temple Judaism (proselyte baptism) and Christianity

Also, Sola Scriptura for the first generation of Reformers doesn't mean the same thing as it does for the Baptists

The first gen Reformers say Scripture is their only source for doctrine, but interpreting it uses outside sources (such as fathers, councils, Creeds, history, reason, etc.)

Baptists ditch the fathers, councils, Creeds, and history for the most part

Excellent distinction to make

for the Sola Scriptura thing, I mean

Constantine is also not someone to base anything theological on, considering he favored the Arians and was baptized by an Arian