Baptism, non-essential!

  • Thread starter Thread starter myfavoritmartin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So Janr then baptism is not always necessary?
The Sacrament of Baptism is always necessary in a normative sense, as has been discussed at length in this thread. However, in particular cases, it is not always possible. Whereby, we acknowledge that our Lord and Creator specializes in the impossible. Thus, we recognize the possiblity of baptism of desire and baptism of martyrdom.

This, as previously discussed, is likened to the necessity of faith. Faith is always necesary in a normative sense, but it is not always possible, as in the case of infants and the severely mentally impaired.

A treatment of this concept can be found here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2538341&postcount=344
 
I wrote a tract on baptism for protestants. I will quote some stuff here. First off, the bible was canonized by the early church it didn’t just get magically put together and drop out of the sky. With that in mind let’s see what those people who were of that time period and among those that canonized scripture taught on baptism since they actually decided what protestants call the final authority. (the bible-minus the books the protestants ripped out-the apocrypha which is actually scripture and something for another thread) BTW, many of these people were direct disciples of the Apostles Peter, John and Paul.

These are from the early church Ante-Nicene (before the council of nicea 325A.D.) So who do you believe? 10,000+ denominations, commentaries from the 1600-1800’s, or those that knew the apostles and were their personal disciples.

And when we come to refute them, we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith … For the baptism instituted by the visible Jesus was for the remission of sins.-Irenaeus 180A.D.Against Heresies Bk.1 chap.21

For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: “Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”-Irenaeus 180A.D. Fragments from the lost writings

… even as our Christ, by being crucified on the tree, and by purifying [us] with water, has redeemed us … We have believed and testify that that very baptism which he announced is alone able to purify those who have repented; and this is the water of life. … Baptize the soul from wrath and from covetousness, from envy , and from hatred and lo! the body is pure –Justin Martyr 160A.D. Dialogue with Trypho chap. 86, 14

We enter, then, the font once: once are sins washed away, because they ought never to be repeated.-Tertullian 198A.D. Unity of baptism.

… before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive-Hermas 95A.D. Pastor of Hermas similitude ninth

… we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God ] and trust in Jesus in our spirit.-Barnabas 70A.D. Epistle of Barnabas
 
Baptism is a covenant sign and is not essential for salvation, in fact I think satan licks his chops at this verse (acts 2:38) in that many people think that being baptized is the necessary factor in salvation.
Your namesake felt otherwise. From The Large Catechism, XIII, 4, “On Baptism”:
we take up Baptism, by which we are first received into the Christian Church.
…
Baptism is no human trifle, but instituted by God Himself … it is most solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we cannot be saved
…
For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore although it is performed by human hands, it is nevertheless truly God’s own work.
…
But if they say, as they are accustomed: “Still Baptism is itself a work, and you say works are of no avail for salvation”; what then, becomes of faith? Answer: “Yes, our works, indeed, avail nothing for salvation; Baptism, however, is not our work, but God’s (for, as was stated, you must put Christ-baptism far away from a bath-keeper’s baptism). God’s works, however, are saving and necessary for salvation…”
Other sources back this up:

“Just so, when we are baptized into everlasting life and the kingdom of heaven … Therefore it is necessary that we should be baptized into Jesus Christ and His death” (Commentary on Romans – Martin Luther, translated by J. Theodore Mueller, p. 101). source]

“Luther taught that the sacraments of baptism and Lord’s Supper are vehicles that communicate the grace of God. … Luther’s concept of baptism did not differ markedly from the Roman Catholic view; he retained much of the Roman ceremony connected with the rite. Luther taught baptism is necessary to salvation and, in fact, produces regeneration in the person. … Luther also upheld infant baptism, teaching that although infants are unable to exercise faith, God through His prevenient grace, works faith in the unconscious child. He based the baptism of infants on the command to baptize all nations (Mt. 28:19)” (Paul Enns in the Moody Handbook of Theology, pp. 452-453). source]
 
We enter, then, the font once: once are sins washed away, because they ought never to be repeated.-Tertullian 198A.D. Unity of baptism.
Tertullian believed that baptismal regeneration came into effect after the resurrection of Christ, but he acknowledged that justification was through faith alone prior to that time:

“And so they say, ‘Baptism is not necessary for them to whom faith is sufficient; for withal, Abraham pleased God by a sacrament of no water, but of faith.’ But in all cases it is the later things which have a conclusive force, and the subsequent which prevail over the antecedent. Grant that, in days gone by, there was salvation by means of bare faith, before the passion and resurrection of the Lord. But now that faith has been enlarged, and is become a faith which believes in His nativity, passion, and resurrection, there has been an amplification added…For the law of baptizing has been imposed” (On Baptism, 13)

Tertullian acknowledges that Abraham was saved through faith alone, but he dismisses Abraham as an exception to the rule. The apostle Paul, however, says that Abraham is the rule (Romans 4:13-16). Paul also denies that Christians are under a “law of baptizing” or any law of works (Romans 3:27, Galatians 3:21-25).
Tertullian goes on, later in his treatise, to add other works to the gospel. He says that people preparing for baptism should “pray with repeated prayers, fasts, and bendings of the knee, and vigils all the night through, and with the confession of all by gone sins” (20). hmmm??
 
Your namesake felt otherwise. From The Large Catechism, XIII, 4, “On Baptism”:

Other sources back this up:

“Just so, when we are baptized into everlasting life and the kingdom of heaven … Therefore it is necessary that we should be baptized into Jesus Christ and His death” (Commentary on Romans – Martin Luther, translated by J. Theodore Mueller, p. 101). source]

“Luther taught that the sacraments of baptism and Lord’s Supper are vehicles that communicate the grace of God. … Luther’s concept of baptism did not differ markedly from the Roman Catholic view; he retained much of the Roman ceremony connected with the rite. Luther taught baptism is necessary to salvation and, in fact, produces regeneration in the person. … Luther also upheld infant baptism, teaching that although infants are unable to exercise faith, God through His prevenient grace, works faith in the unconscious child. He based the baptism of infants on the command to baptize all nations (Mt. 28:19)” (Paul Enns in the Moody Handbook of Theology, pp. 452-453). source]
He was wrong!!!
 
He was wrong!!!
How do you know you aren’t as well?

Really. . .you may find a handful of quotations which seem to support your position that Baptism is unnecessary, but this is not indicative of the weight of the Early Church Fathers’ position nor is it the historical Christian account. It is, for all intents and purposes, your accepted tradition. How do you defend it beyond that?

Many on this thread have offered you countless quotations, Biblical and otherwise, which offer a clear picture not only of the necessity but also the efficacy of sacramental Baptism. You dismiss these, but can not refute them. The Early Church and the vast majority of historical Christianity believed that Baptism was essential.

Further, you have thrown out a theological construct of desired will versus perfect will regarding obedience to God which, at this time, you have abandoned in favor of mincing Tertullian.

I know it is hard to follow a thread and the many tangents they produce, but I’ve really tried to focus the lens a bit that you might consider the connection between faith and obedience towards salvation. The ball is in your court.
 
How do you know you aren’t as well?

How do you defend it beyond that?
With a clean and consise understanding of WHAT scripture says…Not an institutional interpretation.

Truth is this Jane! if it’s a necessity as
ya’ll claim that’d make the “word” contradictory.

Faith saves, be baptised and identify with Christ!
it’s the obedient thing to do.
 
Hi, Martin

Gensis 2:
6 but a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground –
7 then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Funny thing happens in Genesis its water, then breath and life from the Spirit of God.

We had the Holy Spirit from the beginning then the fall.

Peace, oneNow1:thumbsup:
 
HI, Martin

6 but a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground –
7 then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

First came water, then Breath, Spirit and Life.

Peace, OneNow1:coffee:
 
Tertullian believed that baptismal regeneration came into effect after the resurrection of Christ, but he acknowledged that justification was through faith alone prior to that time:
Well of course baptism wasn’t required before it existed! Regenerational baptism had no meaning until Christ.
Tertullian acknowledges that Abraham was saved through faith alone, but he dismisses Abraham as an exception to the rule. The apostle Paul, however, says that Abraham is the rule (Romans 4:13-16). Paul also denies that Christians are under a “law of baptizing” or any law of works (Romans 3:27, Galatians 3:21-25).
And yet Paul himself was baptized (cf. Acts 9:17-18), and he baptized Lydia and her household (cf. Acts 16:14-15), a jailor and his household (cf. Acts 16:27-34), Crispus and his household as well as many other Corinthians (cf. Acts 18:8), and disciples in Ephesus (cf. Acts 19:1-5).

In his letters, Paul speaks highly of baptism:

“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3-4)

“For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body – Jews or Greeks, slaves or free – and all were made to drink of one Spirit.” (1 Corinthians 12:13)

“For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Galatians 3:27)

“There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.” (Ephesians 4:4-6)

“In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.” (Colossians 2:11-12)

Where does he imply that this baptism is optional or that it is a “work”?
Tertullian goes on, later in his treatise, to add other works to the gospel. He says that people preparing for baptism should “pray with repeated prayers, fasts, and bendings of the knee, and vigils all the night through, and with the confession of all by gone sins” (20). hmmm??
How do you suppose a person should prepare for baptism? Even Peter told the crowds to repent and then be baptized (cf. Acts 2:38).
 
With a clean and consise understanding of WHAT scripture says…Not an institutional interpretation.
I understand your gut reaction to “institutional interpretation.” I understand that your institutional tradition requires you to reject those institutional interpretations which challenge its very integrity. It is natural that your knee jerk response would be to condemn any “institutional interpretation” contrary to your own belief system. Yet, do not be fooled, your adherence to a non-regenerative, non-essential, non-efficacious Baptism is itself an “institutional interpretation.” You just like it better than all the rest.
Truth is this Jane! if it’s a necessity as
ya’ll claim that’d make the “word” contradictory.
Again, I understand your general objection here. I really do. I only ask that you interact with the arguement at hand.

How is it possible for you to say “Faith saves,” except when it is impossible (such as in the case of babies and the severely mentally impaired),and reject our understanding of the necessity of Baptism which follows the very same rubric.
Faith saves, be baptised and identify with Christ!
it’s the obedient thing to do.
That’s it?

I encourage you, if this is truly your whole position, to abandon your cliff notes version of the Gospel and open yourself to the full Message of our Savior!

Christ saves. Faith and obedience are our response to His grace. Any measure of grace we are offered is essential to our journey toward salvation. Be open and recieve.
 
your adherence to a non-regenerative, non-essential, non-efficacious Baptism is itself an “institutional interpretation.” You just like it better than all the rest.
Jane opening your heart and mind to true spiritual regeneration will prove to you that regeneration is a baptism of the Spirit, not some reaction to a sacrament administered by some male sinladen person…I pray for your regeneration!
 
Jane opening your heart and mind to true spiritual regeneration will prove to you that regeneration is a baptism of the Spirit, not some reaction to a sacrament administered by some male sinladen person…I pray for your regeneration!
MfM,
That’s a pentecostal interpretation, but by no means a belief held by all Christians.

Also, I suggest that you justify your reference to “a sacrament administered by some male sinladen person” because it implies an indictment of our clergy that is nothing more than a rash generalization, not to mention grossly untrue.

You have no way to know that Jane is unregenerate, or me, or anyone but yourself, or do you now claim to know all hearts? :dts:

If you compare the pentecostal interpretations to both the New Testament and the writings of the early church you’ll quickly discover that that is an extremely new wind of doctrine that has only blown through Christianity in the last 200 years or so.
 
Jane opening your heart and mind to true spiritual regeneration will prove to you that regeneration is a baptism of the Spirit, not some reaction to a sacrament administered by some male sinladen person…

I pray for your regeneration!
This is VERY offensive. I assume from your “holier than Thou” postings that your intention here is to proselytize and not discuss in a charitable manner Christian apologetics.

Your signature even bespeaks an “in your face” attitude about us Catholics.

Robert
 
MfM,
That’s a pentecostal interpretation, but by no means a belief held by all Christians.

Also, I suggest that you justify your reference to “a sacrament administered by some male sinladen person” because it implies an indictment of our clergy that is nothing more than a rash generalization, not to mention grossly untrue.

You have no way to know that Jane is unregenerate, or me, or anyone but yourself, or do you now claim to know all hearts? :dts:

If you compare the pentecostal interpretations to both the New Testament and the writings of the early church you’ll quickly discover that that is an extremely new wind of doctrine that has only blown through Christianity in the last 200 years or so.
CM,
Not an indictment on clergy, rather a fact of scripture that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
 
Jane opening your heart and mind to true spiritual regeneration will prove to you that regeneration is a baptism of the Spirit, …I pray for your regeneration!
Thank you for praying for me. I truly mean that. I firmly believe that if Christians spent more time in prayer for each other there would be little time for judging other people’s hearts.

But, please do not call into question my salvation. I understand if you are frustrated by this thread, but “praying for my regeneration” is nothing short of an insult to me and the work Christ has accomplished in my life. You do not know me.
not some reaction to a sacrament administered by some male sinladen person
I don’t quite know how to respond to this statement as it clearly indicates your vast misunderstanding of how God works and the the function of His ministers in the Church.

It is in the weak that His power shows forth. He takes the lowly and sinful and raises them up to share in His cross and, thus, His new life in the Spirit. Yes, He uses sinful men to achieve his purpose.

The efficacy of the Sacraments is not some mere “reaction” or side effect. It is the effective movement of the Spirit. It is an infusion of grace in the soul which turns man in the direction of the Savior. These fonts of grace are the work of God in the lives of sinful men.

And these sinful men, bishops, priests and deacons, who confer the Sacraments are generous distributors of God’s manifold grace, put at the service of the Church in the measure they have recieved (1 Peter 4:10). The sinfulness of a man needn’t cause you to question his capacity to work for the kingdom. And Christ is glorified through the particular service of sinners and saints alike.

I would appreciate it, however, if you would answer the question posed:
How is it possible for you to say “Faith saves,” except when it is impossible (such as in the case of babies and the severely mentally impaired),and reject our understanding of the necessity of Baptism which follows the very same rubric.
 
Jane stated…
How is it possible for you to say “Faith saves,” except when it is impossible (such as in the case of babies and the severely mentally impaired),and reject our understanding of the necessity of Baptism which follows the very same rubric.
Jane,
Scripture tells us what faith is…These aren’t capable of doing this. Therefore we look to the character and justice of our Creator… Truly i’ll say i do not guarantee that an infant or a dd adult are saved, but based on our Lord character and justice I’d argue they are.
None the less show me where scripture says if your not baptized your not saved…
 
And Jane BTW please forgive me for calling into question your salvation, you’ve stated Jesus is the way and the truth in the past, and I know from my view you live out this truth…
 
Scripture tells us what faith is…
myfavoritemartin:

Well, I am sorry for thinking your reasoning to be SDA (although I will point out some difficulties I see -similarities to- with your views) but it seems that you are three steps removed from mainstream exegesis.

Were you once a Lutheran? Or a Baptist? I sense some freelancing Evangelical forays here and there, especially on your very fluid interpretation of short Scriptural passages out of context.

Maybe if you explain to us poor Catholics these following points, we might become better able to connect our postings into a DISCUSSION.
  1. How is your authority based upon the Bible? (the specifics, please)
  2. Who determines which interpretation of doctrine or dogma (Christian and Catholic) is correct?
  3. How do you define ‘objective interpretation’?
  4. How do you define ‘subjective interpretation’?
  5. What English translation is the authoritative one?
Thanks martin

Robert

These aren’t capable of doing this. Therefore we look to the character and justice of our Creator… Truly i’ll say i do not guarantee that an infant or a dd adult are saved, but based on our Lord character and justice I’d argue they are.
None the less show me where scripture says if your not baptized your not saved…
 
Jane stated…
How is it possible for you to say “Faith saves,” except when it is impossible (such as in the case of babies and the severely mentally impaired),and reject our understanding of the necessity of Baptism which follows the very same rubric.
Scripture tells us what faith is…These aren’t capable of doing this. Therefore we look to the character and justice of our Creator… Truly i’ll say i do not guarantee that an infant or a dd adult are saved, but based on our Lord character and justice I’d argue they are.

None the less show me where scripture says if your not baptized your not saved…
Are you saying, then, that having faith in Jesus Christ is the ordinary way one receives salvation, but God can operate outside that in an extraordinary way to save those that do not have faith in Jesus Christ because they are simply not able to? If so, to whom does God grant this very merciful opportunity? Infants? Mentally disabled people? What about perfectly rational capable humans growing up on some island in the Pacific (or Atlantic) that no one knows about, where the Gospel has not been preached?

Could it be, perhaps, that baptism is an ordinary means of grace, but God can extend grace in extraordinary means to those who could not receive it?

You ask for Scripture showing where it says baptism is mandatory for salvation. I cannot find Scripture saying it’s optional or just for show. I see Scripture where people are ordered to receive baptism (cf. Acts 2:38) – even after receiving the Holy Spirit in an extraordinary way (cf. Acts 10:44-48) – where people ask to receive baptism (cf. Acts 8:36), where people equate “baptism” with “wash[ing] away your sins” (Acts 22:16).

I do not doubt God has a more generous and merciful and just and righteous and loving character than I think He has. I must remember this and humble myself, lest I grumble like a man working in a vineyard since the morning who receives the same wage as those who worked in the vineyard since the late afternoon (cf. Matthew 20:1-16).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top