1. Unless you believe baptism imparts grace, infant baptism will always remain a mystery to you. I believe it does impart grace, based on John 3:5, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6:4 and many other passages. Of course 100% of the early church fathers taught baptismal regeneration. I realize some here think these men were apostate but they were not. They constantly railed against apostasy. Significantly, they reduced to writing many of the practices and beliefs extant in the early Christian community that were so widely held they aren't even mentioned in scripture.
2. There were in fact young children who were baptized in N.T. times. The N.T. gives four (4) instances where entire households were baptized. In those days a household included extended family and servants. A household may be as large as 25-30 people. For none of these four households to have young children would be against the greatest of odds. Remember also that Peter said immediately after his command to repent and be baptized,"For the promise is for you and your children . . . ." " And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them. 16 But Jesus called for them, saying, “Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." This is pretty strong evidence that Jesus approved of infant baptism.
What the RCC endorses
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by DHK, Aug 15, 2014.
Page 3 of 5
-
Baptism does not impart grace; it imparts H2O, water; you get wet.
In John 3:5 the Spirit is the Holy Spirit and water is representative of the Word of God. Water is symbolic of washing.
At the Temple before they entered they went through a number of ceremonnial washings. Water washes.
[FONT="]Psalms 119:9 BETH. Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.
--The question is asked: How shall a young man cleanse his way?
The answer: By obedience to the Word of God. It is the Word that cleanses.
Both OT and NT teaches this.
[/FONT]
[FONT="][FONT="]John 15:3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
--It is the word that cleanses. As water cleanses physically; the Word cleanses spiritually.
Note well that there are two elements necessary for the New Birth:
1. The Holy Spirit, and
2. Water which represents the Word--plainly taught here:
[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT="][FONT="][FONT="]1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.[/FONT] [/FONT]
It is impossible to be born again without the Holy Spirit.
It is impossible to be born again without the Word of God (the gospel).
And that is what John 3:5 teaches. There is no teaching of baptism in John 3:5 whatsoever; no allusion to it, no mention of it at all. It is entirely out of the context of the discussion that Jesus was having with Nicodemus.
[/FONT] -
I have no problem with children getting baptized. I was baptized at 10 years old. I just think the child should have a profession of faith first. I don't recall any instance of someone being baptized without first believing. Even then, the baptism did not free me from the sin in my life nor from the original sin of Adam. That was accomplished by my acceptance of Christ's sacrifice; through blood atonement. The Bible is pretty clear in saying without shedding of blood is no remission. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
It is obvious that Jesus did not intend nor was it his design that his audience take his words literally in John 6 and thus kill and eat him on the spot. Moreover, he provides transitional language from literal to metaphorical throughout this context (Jn. 6:35-36; 45; 60-65) and Peter understood that what he was providing was the "WORDS of life" rather than a command to literally kill him on the spot by eating his body and drinking his blood. He told them explicitly that "MY WORDS" - meaning the words just spoken to them about eating his flesh and drinking his blood were "spirit" or spiritual rather than to be taken literal.
If his words were to be understood literally then he was demanding they kill him on the spot, or at minimum was justifying them murdering him or how else could they partake of eternal life in this literal manner without literally taking his life from him? The Roman Catholic view is nonsense. -
NO examples im the Bible that any other then those who had placed faith in Christ were given that water baptism!
You cannot get that theology from the Bible, but only from doctrines deviaiting from the faith! -
I don't regard myself as either Calvinist or Arminian but I really like this verse: " This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." So yes, I do believe Jesus died for the whole world.
I agree that the blood atonement of Christ is what remits sins. Baptism and the other sacraments are merely the means of transmission of grace. It's like watering a flower bed. The water is what really maintains the healthy growth of the flowers. But the source of the water is a faucet across the yard. You get the water from the faucet to the flowers via a hose which transmits the water. Sacraments don't impart grace any more than a hose stimulates plant growth. Sacraments merely act as the modality of receiving grace, just like a hose serves as the modality of a flower bed receiving water.
As an aside, I wouldn't treat Hebrews 9:22 too expansively. When Jesus healed the paralytic and pronounced his sins forgiven, there was no shedding of blood. He hadn't died on the cross and He didn't tell the man to go out and kill a goat. So there are instances of sins being forgiven without shedding of blood. -
-
But that is not the point is it?
Our authority is not the ECF from whence comes the major heresies introduced into Christianity. Our authority is the Word of God itself. The RCC has gone astray by putting their faith and authority in sources outside of the Word of God. They are not willing to take at face value what God has said in His Word.
It is Jesus that saves: before the cross and after the cross.
Do you deny that Christ saved him? -
-
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
-
Remember I say this as a former Catholic.
A good example is idolatry. I would have been offended if you would have accused me of committing idolatry when I was a Catholic. I equated that to the practice of Hinduism.
But praying to Mary, to the saints in heaven, before the stations of the cross, all, according to the Bible are forms of idolatry. Once the Bible is properly understood it must be admitted that this is idolatry.
The RCC is not our authority. The Bible is. We must go according to what the Bible says; not according to what the RCC does. What do they practice in contrast to what the Bible says. What is practiced cannot be justified by the Word of God. It is impossible.
The worship of Mary cannot be justified by redefining worship, breaking it down into different forms of worship--latria, dulia, etc. All worship is to be directed to God. All prayer is to be directed to God. Any prayer directed to Mary is idolatry. The RCC is guilty of idolatry over and over again. It cannot be justified from a Biblical standpoint.
The same is true with the mass. From a Biblical standpoint it cannot be justified. Christ's present ministry is: that he sits on the right hand of the throne of God making intercession for the saints.
This statement of yours:
Jesus continues to offer himself to his Father as a living sacrifice, and he does so in what the Church specifically states is "an unbloody manner"
is absolutely blasphemous. Jesus died once and for all. He made a one time sacrifice and then it was finished.
[FONT="]Hebrews 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Hebrews 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Hebrews 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;[/FONT]
[FONT="]1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:[/FONT]
There is only one sacrifice--one and only one sacrifice.
We can but remember that sacrifice. It is never offered again--bloody or bloodless. Christ does not continue to offer himself to the Father. That is heresy.
Heb.10:12: Once he had offered himself he then sat down at the right hand of God--never to offer himself again. The Mass is a blasphemous invention of the wicked imaginations of wicked men. -
agreed! DHK
the RCC always says that it is not a sacrifice...however they pray at every mass the following....
Pray, my brothers and sisters, that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father” and they answer, “May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his Church. -
Bro. James Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
The best the Romish System can assure is a purgatory with the hope of being bailed out with enough sale of indulgences, rosaries recited, and icons venerated-- for a special dispensation to pass by Peter at the gates of pearl.
The True Gospel promises eternal life with our Creator-- in heaven through the shed blood of Jesus Christ, once for all--He said "It is finished."
"These things(the Words of God) are written that you may know that you have eternal life."
Why do many not believe? Many have scales on the eyes--the scales of strong delusion, believing a lie.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Bro. James -
And those whose answer is to heed RCC views, warnings from hebrews apply, as we have only ONE sacrifice one and forever already done that can atone for sin! -
Re-presentation: a presentation done again and again and again……
To the strongly deluded wafer-worshipper Walter the Apostate’s ludicrous attempt at making sense out of nonsense is quite reasonable and respectable.
All Catholic priests have been endowed with almighty power to re-create their Creator by mindlessly following a prescribed religious Roman formula.
It matters not that he had just violated the virginal sanctity of the altar boy, altar girl, and fellow priest.
His holy ordination supersedes his unholy moral failings.
To the discerning Spirit-filled Christian the sacrifice of the Mass is an ongoing, repetitive display…..a display of the works of Antichrist, showing the predicted Antichrist in his true colors.
In A.D. 1120 the Waldenses saw the Mass for what it was:
Note the canopy to shield their god from the heat.
A god who melts could be problematic to their faith. -
Page 3 of 5