T
tweetymom
Guest
We sure doIf I could produce a computer mirror I’d give it to you. Thanks for decribing yourself, but we already knew.
A question for some non-catholic,,,The Catholic Church Baptizes infants.
- Status
D
Des
Guest
That gave me a chuckle.
Tweety, you continue to claim to be a Cathoic yet you preach and defend the protestant faith well.
M
Matthew_P_Muehl
Guest
Sorry doki but you have no argument. The burden is on you to show all of us here that when households were baptized infants were not to be included. That infants and babies HAD to know who Christ was before they could be baptized! In your line of thinking St. Paul came to a house stating i’m here to baptize your household but i’m sorry i can’t baptize the infants and children because they don’t know who Christ is.
The longer to try to rebuke infant baptism the more you sound like a fool!
Matthew
R
Richard_Kastner
Guest
Matt.28:19-20
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.
The word teach in Matt. 28:19 is translated from the Greek matheteuo which means to make disciples.
The word teaching in Matt.28:20 is translated from the Greek didasko which means to instruct.
So what Christ is telling us to do here is to go into the world and make disciples of all nations and then He tells us how we are to do that and that is by instructing them in all things I have commanded you and we are to do this before we baptise them. Why do you think this is. It would be my guess that because baptism is a profession of faith in Jesus Christ and what He did for us. We have to know exactly who and what it is we are professing faith in. A baby is not capable of understanding the instructions necessary in order to become a disciple of Christ and therefore cannot be baptised.
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.
The word teach in Matt. 28:19 is translated from the Greek matheteuo which means to make disciples.
The word teaching in Matt.28:20 is translated from the Greek didasko which means to instruct.
So what Christ is telling us to do here is to go into the world and make disciples of all nations and then He tells us how we are to do that and that is by instructing them in all things I have commanded you and we are to do this before we baptise them. Why do you think this is. It would be my guess that because baptism is a profession of faith in Jesus Christ and what He did for us. We have to know exactly who and what it is we are professing faith in. A baby is not capable of understanding the instructions necessary in order to become a disciple of Christ and therefore cannot be baptised.
R
RockyRoad
Guest
I didn’t realize that calling someone a fool is allowed here. I think it’s a suspendable offense. Perhaps you should report yourself…Hmmmm.
M
Matthew_P_Muehl
Guest
Did i call him a fool? I said he sounded like one!
E
elvisman
Guest
Doki, Doki-**If I could produce a computer mirror I’d give it to you. Thanks for decribing yourself, but we already knew.
This is getting embarassing. If you can’t answer it - just say so.
**Are you up for the challenge or not? **
I have asked you twice now:
Can you please give me a clear and comprehensive response to what the Fathers taught about infant Baptism and how they not only supported it but practiced it?
I issue this challenge to ALL Protestants who deny infant Baptism.
R
RockyRoad
Guest
I see…that makes it much better.
S
SpiritusSanctus
Guest
Yes, it is John 3:5. Type in Douay Rheimes Catholic Bible on your computer, then click on John under The New Testament, then click on chapter 3. I will go ahead and post the verse anyway, though.
John 3:5. “Jesus answered:Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
Now, Protestants believe that being born again means you ask Jesus into your heart. That’s not what Christ is saying here, though. He is talking about baptism, and how one must be baptized in order enter Heaven. Afterall, baptism does involve water and the Holy Ghost entering your soul, and if you read a few verses down it specifically begins talking about baptism.
R
RockyRoad
Guest
I understand what you are saying…but that is not in line with the CCC.
R
Richard_Kastner
Guest
elvisman;6487641 said:
I issue this challenge to ALL Protestants who deny infant Baptism.
No offence but who cares what the ECF taught or did? Maybe you didn’t catch my post.
L
Loboto-Me
Guest
I’m still flabbergasted by all the protestants ignoring the promise to the children LOL!
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
rev is not a Cathloic,he is a baptist
E
elvisman
Guest
No offense, but that has to be one of the most preposterous and ignorant statements I’ve read on this thread so far.
**Who cares what the ECFs taught or did? **
It was they who carried on the teachings and traditions of the Apostles.
It is through them that the Holy Spirit worked to spread the faith around the world and continued to establish the Church.
It is through them that the Holy Spirit revealed the Canon of Scripture.
It was they who willingly gave their lives and suffered the most horrible deaths for the truth that people today take for granted.
I don’t know of one, single, solitary Protestant theologian who DOESN’T think we owe them a great debt of gratitude for these things. They would ALL disagree with you.
No – you won’t answer my challenge because you don’t have a leg to stand on – NOT because the ECFs were irrelevant.
**Who cares what the ECFs taught or did – indeed . . . **
**Who cares what the ECFs taught or did? **
It was they who carried on the teachings and traditions of the Apostles.
It is through them that the Holy Spirit worked to spread the faith around the world and continued to establish the Church.
It is through them that the Holy Spirit revealed the Canon of Scripture.
It was they who willingly gave their lives and suffered the most horrible deaths for the truth that people today take for granted.
I don’t know of one, single, solitary Protestant theologian who DOESN’T think we owe them a great debt of gratitude for these things. They would ALL disagree with you.
No – you won’t answer my challenge because you don’t have a leg to stand on – NOT because the ECFs were irrelevant.
**Who cares what the ECFs taught or did – indeed . . . **
L
LionHeart777
Guest
I do!
brother Richard Kastner,
I can understand how you can think they (the ECF’s) were mistaken if you are so certain of your view, but are you at least willing to entertain the possibility that you are the one who is mistaken on this topic and not they (if you support “Believer’s Baptism” and or deny infant baptism.)?
I think that it is logical to expect that if the Apostles had held to “Believer’s Baptism” in that it was merely an outward symbol and that it was not proper to baptise infants, then one should expect the successors of the Apostles to hold this view. As the quotes from the ECF’s point out, they in fact did not; or none that I am aware of at least. Please show me if you find one to the contrary.
Will you agree that if the Bible does not specifically address infant baptism, than it does not specifically forbid it either? As you can see by others posts, a case can be made for the Catholic view(s) on Baptism on a Scriptural basis. To me, regarding the Scriptural evidence for infant baptism, this is a case of one of our beliefs being reflected in Scripture but not necessarily explicitly taught in Scripture (see my comments on the Bible as an instruction manual below.)
Since the testimonies of the earliest Christians we have who wrote on the matter besides the Divinely inspired author’s themselves seem to me to be unanimous on Baptismal Regeneration (at least to those properly disposed) and infant baptism, I think it is reasonable to suspect “Believer’s Baptism” as a novelty. We know that Scripture can be misinterpreted and even twisted (not that you are intentionally twisting Scripture or even doing it for that matter.) Given that fact, and the fact that St. Peter tells us in Scripture that:
"15And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Peter+3&version=KJV) (Accessed 4/ 5/ 10).
If Scripture written by St. Paul is subject to being “wrest” by the “unlerned and unstable”, I think that it’s not such a stretch for one to assume that this cann happen with other Scripture. This is where I believe Sacred Tradition comes in to play, to help the Church from not misinterpreting or accepting misinterpretations of Sacred Scripture.
I have come to believe that the Bible is not an instruction manuel nor does it read like one, but it certainly contains many instructions. I believe that if the Bible is seperated from Sacred Tradition (which I believe includes the writing’s of the ECF’s), then this facilitates the misinterpretation of Scripture.
So given that misinterpretations of Scripture are possible (as I believe I have established), what evidence can you offer me outside of Scripture that your rejection of infant Baptism is warranted?
peace
R
Richard_Kastner
Guest
Eman , You go off on this diversionary tirad and you completely ignore my post. You issued a challenge.
E
elvisman
Guest
Sorry – your response as neither comprehensive nor thorough.
You didn’t address WHY the ECFs taught what they did about Baptism. All you say is that you don’t care. That is HARDLY a “comprehensive” answer.**
It’s a COP OUT.
NNNNEEEXXT!
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Was Catholic now Baptist.
Show me one example in the Bible where a infant, child was baptized? The whole household does not count in this example for the word infant, child is not there.
Show me one example in the Bible where a adult was baptized?
What did they need to do inorder to be baptized?
L
Loboto-Me
Guest
The onus is on you to prove that infant baptism is not something that was/is allowed.
The original post below :
The Catholic Church Baptizes infants. Show me the Biblical authority to do this?
Where does it say in Holy Scripture, “Do not Baptize infants”? Show me the Biblical authority NOT to Baptize infants?
**Jesus Christ said in Matt 28:19, “GO, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit…” **
He did not say adults only did he? Did he ever put an age limit to receive Baptism?
Now can you please answer the original question rather than try to make us do summersaults (which we’ve already done) trying to show you historical proof as well as biblical proof. Your turn now.
My sympathies to you on your deconversion, I will pray that God allows you graces to come back to His truth.
Honestly, in terms of protestantism (those that were born into it especially) my thoughts are that everyone needs to get to Christ with what they have to work with, and do manage to do it even if it’s the hard way.
It’s sad for those that have left the Church and have thrown away perfectly beautiful tools toward God which is the full truth and the sacraments of the Church. To think that they had truth in their grasp and let it go.
Whether we as Catholics feel that protestants are errant but still contain enough truth to get to God, we are called to help them find their way toward the Sacraments which make getting to Him so so so much easier (and actually more beautiful IMO… but then I’m a Catholic)
The original post below :
The Catholic Church Baptizes infants. Show me the Biblical authority to do this?
Where does it say in Holy Scripture, “Do not Baptize infants”? Show me the Biblical authority NOT to Baptize infants?
**Jesus Christ said in Matt 28:19, “GO, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit…” **
He did not say adults only did he? Did he ever put an age limit to receive Baptism?
Now can you please answer the original question rather than try to make us do summersaults (which we’ve already done) trying to show you historical proof as well as biblical proof. Your turn now.
My sympathies to you on your deconversion, I will pray that God allows you graces to come back to His truth.
Honestly, in terms of protestantism (those that were born into it especially) my thoughts are that everyone needs to get to Christ with what they have to work with, and do manage to do it even if it’s the hard way.
It’s sad for those that have left the Church and have thrown away perfectly beautiful tools toward God which is the full truth and the sacraments of the Church. To think that they had truth in their grasp and let it go.
Whether we as Catholics feel that protestants are errant but still contain enough truth to get to God, we are called to help them find their way toward the Sacraments which make getting to Him so so so much easier (and actually more beautiful IMO… but then I’m a Catholic)
D
Dokimas
Guest
Sorry you can’t see the logic. No big deal. BTW, I’m not rebuking anything; just trying to show that it’s not a logical step to think that infants need to be baptized or that the early church did baptize them. Make fun all you want; I’ll not be the one looking foolish.
- Status