The infant baptism case is very interesting and detailed and I would hesitate to say I can represent it well after one listening.
So here goes :) the baptismal standing of the infant is relevant and valid because it is founded upon the patriarchal, familial, tribal and/or church standing of the relevant authority in the infant’s life. The further understanding being that church membership and inclusion in covenant is not confined to the saved, but necessarily includes individuals who may ultimately be judged unworthy of the kingdom.”
Thus Jesus says:
1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
John 15 KJV
Therefore we know that there are branches grafted in which will be taken away and burned later because they fail to bear fruit.
This is a poor skim over a deep and detailed lecture that I would recommend listening to.
On the flat earth I’m still an agnostic. I really wish one side or other could settle all the arguements, but I am sufficiently overwhelmed with irl and other theological issues that it may not reach the top of my list anytime soon.
I feel like the arguments lean round earth but I want it to be flat for some reason. There are some clear uses of deception like with the picture of the earth that was a "composite" rather than actual picture. Which makes us wonder why that was faked. But probably it was just to siphon off tax monies by presenting grander space achievements than are real to get more funding.
Yes, well put. I have no doubt that NASA is a deception, and there are so many aspect of the globe theory that seem to be untrue. I haven’t yet been able to find a convincing cosmology consistent with flat or dome earth but as I say I haven’t made it my main focus yet.
I think what makes me lean somewhat towards the non-globe theory is the vicious attacks and demands for an end to debate from the globers.
I don't know if this applies to either of your thought processes but as a "round earther", I'd like to present this event: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_Neptune
Neptune was discovered only after it's location was mathematically estimated with gravimetric equations.
Uranus was discovered in the same way right before. These equations do not work with a flat earth model
So here goes :) the baptismal standing of the infant is relevant and valid because it is founded upon the patriarchal, familial, tribal and/or church standing of the relevant authority in the infant’s life. The further understanding being that church membership and inclusion in covenant is not confined to the saved, but necessarily includes individuals who may ultimately be judged unworthy of the kingdom.”
Thus Jesus says:
1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
John 15 KJV
Therefore we know that there are branches grafted in which will be taken away and burned later because they fail to bear fruit.
This is a poor skim over a deep and detailed lecture that I would recommend listening to.
On the flat earth I’m still an agnostic. I really wish one side or other could settle all the arguements, but I am sufficiently overwhelmed with irl and other theological issues that it may not reach the top of my list anytime soon.
I feel like the arguments lean round earth but I want it to be flat for some reason. There are some clear uses of deception like with the picture of the earth that was a "composite" rather than actual picture. Which makes us wonder why that was faked. But probably it was just to siphon off tax monies by presenting grander space achievements than are real to get more funding.
I think what makes me lean somewhat towards the non-globe theory is the vicious attacks and demands for an end to debate from the globers.
I don't know if this applies to either of your thought processes but as a "round earther", I'd like to present this event: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_of_Neptune
Neptune was discovered only after it's location was mathematically estimated with gravimetric equations.
Uranus was discovered in the same way right before. These equations do not work with a flat earth model