Baptism (immersed in water) is necessary

  • Thread starter Thread starter postwriter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Where did you get the idea that Catholics are not Christians?
only the blood of christ takes the stain of sin away. nothing else period.Catholics believe this. Where are you getting your information?

I am frankly quite surprised to hear this bizarre allegation on these forums, where our Protestant participants are usually a little more up to speed.

Really: where did you get the idea that Catholics are not Christians?
most of the bizarre allegations come from the bizarre teaching on this forum.when did the catholic church break away from the simplicity of truth? so if being up to speed in your fashion takes me away from the god who first loved me, i would put a halt to all religious beliefs and bow my head and beat my chest and pray god forgive me a sinner.
 
Yes, his father was from the division of Abijah, so that makes John from a priestly clan.

Luke 1:5
here was a priest named Zechari’ah, of the division of Abi’jah; and he had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth."
You do know that the “Aaron” that is mentioned here is the brother of Moses from the tribe of Levites. Elizabeth is a descendant of his. And her son is from that same tribe making him a Levite priest.
 
The commandment from God

**Genesis 2:17 **
17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

if there is no original sin, then we do not need a Savior

Breaking God’s commandment

Genesis 3

6When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.

The punishment from God

Genesis 3:14-19

16To the woman He said,
“I will greatly multiply
Your pain in childbirth,
In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he will rule over you.”

17Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and **have eaten from the tree **about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’;
Cursed is the ground because of you;
In toil you will eat of it
All the days of your life.
18"Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you;
And you will eat the plants of the field;
19By the sweat of your face
You will eat bread,
Till you return to the ground,
Because from it you were taken;
** For you are dust,
And to dust you shall return.” **

Job 14
Code:
**1**"**Man, who is born of woman**,
     Is short-lived and full of turmoil.
** 4**"Who can make the** clean out of the unclean**?
No one!

All humans are afflicted with original sin, and this includes babies as well.

Psalm 51:5
Code:
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
     And **in sin my mother conceived me. **
We have inherited Adam’s sin from the moment of our conception. This is why babies need baptism – to wash away the original sin inherited from Adam and Eve.

**Romans 5:12 **

12Therefore, just as** through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men**, because all sinned–

sin came into the world through one man, Adam, and death came through this sin. This sin affects all people, men and women, babies and adults. Through the merits of Jesus Christ, we have the sacrament of baptism to wash away the sin that came through Adam.

**Romans 5:14 **

14Nevertheless **death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, **who is a type of Him who was to come.

**Romans 5:16 **

16The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.

the judgment following one single trespass brought condemnation for all. This means all have inherited the sin of Adam, and all must be washed clean of this sin in the waters of baptism.

Romans 5:19
19For as through the **one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, **even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners. Original sin is passed on as part of the human condition, and only God in the flesh could atone for our sins by the eternal sacrifice of Himself. Through this sacrifice, God has re-opened the doors to heaven, and through baptism, we are once again made children of God.

**1 Corinthians 15:21 **

21For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead.

In Adam, all die. In Christ, the new Adam, all now may live.

Ephesians 2

Made Alive in Christ

1And **you were dead in your trespasses and sins, **
2in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.

3Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

we were all dead through sin and all lived in the passions of our flesh until Christ came to save us.

Original Sin! Because it came from Adam “originally”.

scripturecatholic.com/baptism.html#baptism-V
 
Who says immersion baptism is necessary? When did they say it? And why isn’t the amount of water recorded in scripture? I need names and dates please.
 
Why do you think Jesus taught His disciples to baptize in water?
If the answer to this question was as clear cut as many seem to think it is, there wouldn’t be a need for a Post #225 on the subject!

Why do people continue to ask questions such as, does baptism meaning to immerse in water? IMHO, it is because they keep repeating the same rituals over and over again and feel like something is missing. So they question the value of water baptism. They keep getting the same circular answers that lead to the same old questions. Ultimately, they give up trying to make sense of anything regarding religion, and stop going to Church all together.
– end of IMHO statement –

What really amazes me, is that after about 6 months of participating on topics related to baptism is that not one Roman Catholic has made the point I’m about to make . . . .

What first got me curious about the ambiguity of the meaning of baptism was when I first read John the Baptist account of what kind of Baptism Jesus is going to bring in Mt 3:11 -
"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Also, when I first read Eph 4:5 -
one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

OK, so I compiled a list that looks like this:
  1. There is only one baptism.
  2. John the Baptist says Jesus is going to Baptize in something other than water.
  3. That something other is the Holy Spirit.
    4, Conclusion, Baptism = Holy Spirit.
Then, I studied the the greek word for baptize, guess what, it doesn’t mean to immerse!

Now I have an opinion as to why people won’t let go of their water baptism ritual – but I’ll save that for another time.
 
I take it you are not a Roman Catholic?:confused:
Oh, I am a Roman Catholic. I hold that the NAB and in particular its notes is a very sorry translation and resource. The Vatican uses the RSV-CE as its English Language Bible. Pick up some of the Holy Father’s books. They all use the RSV-CE.

Here is what the RSV-CE says;

Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

We are born anew through the Sacrament of Baptism.

We become Children of God by dying with Christ in our baptism and arising anew in life with Him. We do this in faith and obedience to His Word.
 
only the blood of christ takes the stain of sin away. nothing else period.
Catholics believe this. Where are you getting your information?

I am frankly quite surprised to hear this bizarre allegation on these forums, where our Protestant participants are usually a little more up to speed.

Really: where did you get the idea that Catholics are not Christians?
most of the bizarre allegations come from the bizarre teaching on this forum.when did the catholic church break away from the simplicity of truth? so if being up to speed in your fashion takes me away from the god who first loved me, i would put a halt to all religious beliefs and bow my head and beat my chest and pray god forgive me a sinner.This is a great topic but for another thread. How about starting one?
 
Before I begin… Welcome to the CAF!

** 1st.**

Acts 2:38

Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Why don’t you read the next verse**?**

Acts 2:39

39 “For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself.”

** Children were not excluded.**

2nd.

Acts 2:41


So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.

Added to what?
The Bible? or The Church?

Acts 2:42


They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

They were added to the Church.

**3rd. **

**
1 Timothy 3:15 **

but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the** pillar and support of the truth**.

The Bible says that the Church is where we get the truth.

**Which church? **

Look at history and you will see that in 1517ad. Martin Luther (a Catholic monk) started the “Protestant Reformation” a movement. And before that year there were no “Protestants” none.

So 490 years ago the Protestant denominations were “born”.

In 1516,1416,1316,1216,1116,1000,900,800,700,600,500,400,300,200,100,90,80,70,60,50, 40’s.

There is only

One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

One Lord,One Faith and One Baptism.

One Shepherd, One Bride, One Bridegroom, One Spirit, One Body

One Church

The Catholic Church.

Jesus left us a church just like He promised. Matthew 16:18

So the next question? Where did the Bible come from?

The Bible never says how much water to use for baptism.Think about it do you really think they had running water in their house back then?

How did they “immerse” an adult in the house?Or in the jail?

Look up the word “Baptise” it comes from the Greek language it means

to dip
to bathe
to immerse
to pour

We inherited the sin of Adam and Eve. It is called “Original Sin” because the sin “originated” from them.

We are born with Original Sin.

When we are older and break the Laws of God we commit the sin ourself. That is called “Actual Sin”

We carry the faith for our children until they can carry it for themselves. Just like the Jewish babies were circumcised when they were 8 days old on the basis of the faith of their parents.

Baptism replaced circumcision.

Children were included in the old covenant with God.
They are still included in the new covenant with God.

Ok I’m done:hypno:
I hope I make sense, God Bless!
Amen,amen finally there is someone who writes a post that gets IT!
 
If the answer to this question was as clear cut as many seem to think it is, there wouldn’t be a need for a Post #225 on the subject!

Why do people continue to ask questions such as, does baptism meaning to immerse in water? IMHO, it is because they keep repeating the same rituals over and over again and feel like something is missing. So they question the value of water baptism. They keep getting the same circular answers that lead to the same old questions. Ultimately, they give up trying to make sense of anything regarding religion, and stop going to Church all together.
– end of IMHO statement –

What really amazes me, is that after about 6 months of participating on topics related to baptism is that not one Roman Catholic has made the point I’m about to make . . . .

What first got me curious about the ambiguity of the meaning of baptism was when I first read John the Baptist account of what kind of Baptism Jesus is going to bring in Mt 3:11 -
"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Also, when I first read Eph 4:5 -
one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

OK, so I compiled a list that looks like this:
  1. There is only one baptism.
  2. John the Baptist says Jesus is going to Baptize in something other than water.
  3. That something other is the Holy Spirit.
    4, Conclusion, Baptism = Holy Spirit.
Then, I studied the the greek word for baptize, guess what, it doesn’t mean to immerse!

Now I have an opinion as to why people won’t let go of their water baptism ritual – but I’ll save that for another time.
Why didn’t you answer my question, tabcom? Why did Jesus allow the disciples to baptize with water?

You did study the word baptize, and you did come to understand that one of the meanings is to immerse. You showed this on your study of the pickle recipe. That is not the only meaning of the word, but it is an important one.

Jesus baptism with HS and Fire is accomplished in the water. That is how He set it up, and that is how it has been done for 2000 years. I would still like to hear your answer to my question. I am also interested to know why you think people are so attached to water baptism, since you believe Jesus did not teach this.
 
Returning to po18guy’s commentary . . .

With respects to . . .

Footnotes from New American Bible
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops


John 3:3
Jesus answered and said to him, “Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born 3 from above.”

3 [3] Born: see the note on John 1:13. From above: the Greek adverb anothen means both “from above” and “again.” Jesus means “from above” (see John 3:31) but Nicodemus misunderstands it as “again.” This misunderstanding serves as a springboard for further instruction.

John 1:13
**8 **who were born not by natural generation nor by human choice nor by a man’s decision but of God.

8 [13] Believers in Jesus become children of God not through any of the three natural causes mentioned but through God who is the immediate cause of the new spiritual life. Were born: the Greek verb can mean “begotten” (by a male) or “born” (from a female or of parents). The variant “he who was begotten,” asserting Jesus’ virginal conception, is weakly attested in Old Latin and Syriac versions.

Thus, your claim has been refuted.
:confused: I am confused. Are you saying that this footnote refutes the notion that “born again” is baptism?
 
  1. The ordinance which is clearly done away with is circumcision of the flesh. Baptism is cited as a replacement that is in the order of a spiritual circumcision that “puts off the body of the flesh.” This is in keeping with what Paul says about living in the flesh vs. living in the Spirit, and baptism brings with it the gift of the Holy Spirit.
So, the rite of circumcision practiced by the Jews (Jesus included) was replaced among the non-Jews with the rite of baptism. And while the former literally “puts off the body of the flesh”, the latter spiritually puts off the flesh of the heart, which is original sin. Am I correct?
 
I am confused. Are you saying that this footnote refutes the notion that “born again” is baptism?
Born again - as in, born from above (spiritual) vs. born from the flesh. To be born again from above does require a baptism - by the Holy Spirit. The water that Nicodemus was alluding to – and the footnotes from the NAB points out – was the water from his mother. From a personal example, my wife is six months pregnant. There is going to come a day in February when her ‘water breaks’ and I’ll have to take her to the hospital for the delivery of our baby.
Why didn’t you answer my question, tabcom? Why did Jesus allow the disciples to baptize with water?
I’m not sure what exactly you are asking. Could you please rephrase the question?
You did study the word baptize, and you did come to understand that one of the meanings is to immerse. You showed this on your study of the pickle recipe. That is not the only meaning of the word, but it is an important one.
What that link was attempting to point out is that baptizo is the physical change that takes place. NOT the physical movement of an object into a fluid. I have always maintained that baptizo is a permanent change only.

See post #66 for the greek parsing of baptizo in Acts 10:47.

You insist the word means to immerse; that is, to dip into or engross fully in water – used as an adjective.

Whereas the usage of baptized in Acts 10:47 is an infinitive. I suggest all that are interested to take a closer look as to what an infinitive is and how it differs from an adjective.
I am also interested to know why you think people are so attached to water baptism, since you believe Jesus did not teach this.
Because they love the filth of their own sin more than doing the Will of God.
 
Born again - as in, born from above (spiritual) vs. born from the flesh. To be born again from above does require a baptism - by the Holy Spirit. The water that Nicodemus was alluding to – and the footnotes from the NAB points out – was the water from his mother. .
Tab, I’m glad you brought this up. Can you please identify the source from which the idea that the water Nicodemus refers to is amniotic fluid. I have failed to identify a source for this interpretation.

I would be most grateful.
 
Born again - as in, born from above (spiritual) vs. born from the flesh. To be born again from above does require a baptism - by the Holy Spirit. The water that Nicodemus was alluding to – and the footnotes from the NAB points out – was the water from his mother. From a personal example, my wife is six months pregnant. There is going to come a day in February when her ‘water breaks’ and I’ll have to take her to the hospital for the delivery of our baby.
I, too, would like to see you defend this. The NAB notes do not mean this. As far as I know there are no documents referring to this concept prior to Zwingli. I can find no where in the bible where water is used as a euphemism for vaginal birth.

Inquiring minds want to know how you will defend this.
 
Before I begin… Welcome to the CAF!

** 1st.**

Acts 2:38

Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Why don’t you read the next verse**?**

Acts 2:39

39 “For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself.”

** Children were not excluded.**

2nd.

Acts 2:41


So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.

Added to what?
The Bible? or The Church?

Acts 2:42


They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

They were added to the Church.

**3rd. **

**
1 Timothy 3:15 **

but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the** pillar and support of the truth**.

The Bible says that the Church is where we get the truth.

**Which church? **

Look at history and you will see that in 1517ad. Martin Luther (a Catholic monk) started the “Protestant Reformation” a movement. And before that year there were no “Protestants” none.

So 490 years ago the Protestant denominations were “born”.

In 1516,1416,1316,1216,1116,1000,900,800,700,600,500,400,300,200,100,90,80,70,60,50, 40’s.

There is only

One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

One Lord,One Faith and One Baptism.

One Shepherd, One Bride, One Bridegroom, One Spirit, One Body

One Church

The Catholic Church.

Jesus left us a church just like He promised. Matthew 16:18

So the next question? Where did the Bible come from?

The Bible never says how much water to use for baptism.Think about it do you really think they had running water in their house back then?

How did they “immerse” an adult in the house?Or in the jail?

Look up the word “Baptise” it comes from the Greek language it means

to dip
to bathe
to immerse
to pour

We inherited the sin of Adam and Eve. It is called “Original Sin” because the sin “originated” from them.

We are born with Original Sin.

When we are older and break the Laws of God we commit the sin ourself. That is called “Actual Sin”

We carry the faith for our children until they can carry it for themselves. Just like the Jewish babies were circumcised when they were 8 days old on the basis of the faith of their parents.

Baptism replaced circumcision.

Children were included in the old covenant with God.
They are still included in the new covenant with God.

Ok I’m done:hypno:
I hope I make sense, God Bless!
I haven’t read the entire post (it’s kinda long and I don’t have time to read all of it–I’m at work) but wanted to say:

Well put fellowChristian!👍
 
I, too, would like to see you defend this. The NAB notes do not mean this. As far as I know there are no documents referring to this concept prior to Zwingli. I can find no where in the bible where water is used as a euphemism for vaginal birth.

Inquiring minds want to know how you will defend this.
I’m not asking for a defense of the “amniotic fluid” thesis. All I’m asking for is a source identifying the origin of this interpretation. I’m not basically talking theology. I’m talking history.
 
Born again - as in, born from above (spiritual) vs. born from the flesh. To be born again from above does require a baptism - by the Holy Spirit. The water that Nicodemus was alluding to – and the footnotes from the NAB points out – was the water from his mother. From a personal example, my wife is six months pregnant. There is going to come a day in February when her ‘water breaks’ and I’ll have to take her to the hospital for the delivery of our baby.
This is a misunderstanding of the footnote. I thought that is what you meant, but I wanted to be sure first. Jesus said that one must be “born from above by water and spirit”. That means the second birth involves both water, and spirit. Nicodemus did not understand what Jesus meant about being born again, so He explained it. Jesus also taught His disciples to baptise with water for repentance, after the manner of John. After the spirit was poured out, the waters of baptism were infused with Spirit, and Fire.
I’m not sure what exactly you are asking. Could you please rephrase the question?
You are contending that Jesus’ baptism did not include water. In the light of this, I am curious to know why you think he taught His disciples to do water baptism, and encouraged them to do it.

“After this Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea; there he remained with them and baptized. 23 John also was baptizing at Ae’non near Salim, because there was much water there; and people came and were baptized. 24 For John had not yet been put in prison.” John 3:22-24

Let’s see if we can see eye to eye on a few things first…
  1. Do you agree that this passage falls right after Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born from above by water and spirit?
  2. Do you agree that Jesus and His disciples went to Judea and that Jesus remained there with them and baptized people with water?
  3. Do you agree that this passage is speaking about the baptism of repentance, and that it is a water baptism?
What that link was attempting to point out is that baptizo is the physical change that takes place. NOT the physical movement of an object into a fluid. I have always maintained that baptizo is a permanent change only.
The two cannot be separated, tabcom. The permanent change takes place because the item is immersed in fluid. that is the immediate causal act of the change.
See post #66 for the greek parsing of baptizo in Acts 10:47.
I thought you did a fine job.
You insist the word means to immerse; that is, to dip into or engross fully in water – used as an adjective.

I do not. I am saying that this is on accurate use of the word. The Pickles were first dunked (briefly) in a solution, then removed, immersed in another solution and left there. Their basic nature was changed as a result, just as we are permanently changed in baptism. Pickles can never go back to being cucumbers.
tabcom;2948044:
Because they love the filth of their own sin more than doing the Will of God.
Ok, I am confused on this one. You think that people are attached to water baptism because they love the filth of their own sin more than doing the will of God? You will have to explain this some more.

If the people believe that baptism washes away sin, then how is participating in it an attachment to filth?
 
So, the rite of circumcision practiced by the Jews (Jesus included) was replaced among the non-Jews with the rite of baptism. And while the former literally “puts off the body of the flesh”, the latter spiritually puts off the flesh of the heart, which is original sin. Am I correct?
Actually, it is baptism that “puts off the body of the flesh.” This is tied to the washing away of original sin. It is original sin that causes us to live “in the flesh.” Once we are baptized we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, and are by the grace of God able to live in the Spirit and not in the flesh. The flesh is a reference to our carnal fallen nature.

Baptism does give us a circumcision of the heart in the washing away of original sin. This again is a matter of grace and living in the spirit.

I hope this helps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top