R
rinnie
Guest
Not problem there Ed fire away. But tonight I have a full house (first ex. Steeler game) so will get back to ya tommorow. Or whenever you ask me. thanks.
- Status
Z
Zundrah
Guest
Hmm, where do I start?
Children and babies should not be baptized. …unless that child can say, “Jesus Christ is my lord and saviour” then I guess they should not be baptized!
Amen.
E
EdOsiecki
Guest
, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, AND SPRINKLED both the book, and ALL THE PEOPLE, 20 SAYING, THIS IS THE BLOOD OF THE TESTAMENT which GOD HATH ENJOINED UNTO YOU. 21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. 22 And ALMOST ALL THINGS by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.] Note Water and blood of the testament are mixed together.
[Hb10:1 For THE LAW having A SHODOW OF good THINGS TO COME, and NOT THE VERY IMAGE of the things, CAN NEVER WITH THOSE SACRIFICES which they offered year by year continually MAKE THE COMERS thereunto PERFECT. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But IN THOSE SACRIFICES THERE IS A REMEMBRANCE again made OF SINS every year. 4 For IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAT THE BLOOD OF BULLS and OF GOATS should TAKE AWAY SINS.]
JL: Acts 2:37 Now WHEN THEY HEARD this, THEY WERE PRICKED IN THEIR HEART, AND SAID unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, WHAT SHALL WE DO? 38 Then PETER SAID unto them, REPENT, and **BE BAPTIZED **every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the REMISSION OF SINS, and ye shall RECEIVE THE gift of the HOLY GHOST.
Acts22:16 And now why tarriest thou? ARISE, and BE BAPTIZED, and WASH AWAY THY SINS, calling on the name of the Lord.
In water baptism we are crucifed WITH Christ UNITED to HIS DEATH and HIS SHED ATONING BLOOD, just as scripture tell us, just as Moses mixed blood and water and sprinkled those who brought into the old covenant. As Christ does in water baptism that brings the baptized into the new covenant.
Rv1:5 And from JESUS CHRIST, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him THAT LOVED US us, and **WASHED US FROM **our SINS IN HIS OWN BLOOD.Hi jIhagus Thanks for your reply. You make it difficult for me to respond when you Shout pages at me. How can we be united with Christ in baptism, as you say, when baptism does not atone for sins? John makes it very clear Mat 3:11 that he baptizes with water for repentance. Heb 9:22 very clearly states, “without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. That shedding of blood started with Adam & Eve as I mentioned in my reply on post 408… If one is united with Christ per water baptism (there is a Holy Spirit baptism too) why wasn’t Simon in Acts 8:13 united with Christ when he got baptized? He was later rebuked by Peter. The thief on the cross wasn’t baptized yet he was in Christ because of his belief. Why is Paul in Acts 19:4 telling the disciples that John’s baptism is insufficient to be saved? They must be baptized in the Holy Spirit? One can’t be saved without the Holy Spirit . Baptism is a sign of repentance, a turning to God by confessing their sins. It’s not until we believe in Christ’s shed blood that we are then united with Christ. A person can be baptized many times over and also confess sins to God and still be unsaved. Like Simon wasn’t saved. It’s the belief in Jesus that saves. When the jailor asked Paul how can he be saved? Paul did not say go get baptized, he said believe in Jesus. When the jailor did so, he and his household were then baptized a sign of repentance and their start of a new spiritual life. Cornelius and company got saved by hearing the gospel being preached to them by Peter and later got baptized. You site 1 Pet 3:21, but v20 must be read in order to get the clear meaning. It speaks about baptism for a good conscience (repentance) but it’s the Resurrection of Jesus that saves. Read the following John 3:16,36; 5:24; Acts 16:31; Rom 1:17;4:5 they say nothing about baptism. Mark 16:16, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” Nowhere does it say,” whoever is not baptized will be condemned.” One must believe followed by baptism for repentance” Do you agree? ED O.
F
Filioque
Guest
Post 412 does bring up a question for Sola Scriptura proponents.
If in St. Luke Chaper 3 Verse 16 says: “I am baptising with water but one mightier than I is comming I am not worthy to loosen the thongs of his sandals. He will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire.”
That either means that either,
If in St. Luke Chaper 3 Verse 16 says: “I am baptising with water but one mightier than I is comming I am not worthy to loosen the thongs of his sandals. He will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire.”
That either means that either,
- someone besides Jesus was to come.
- Jesus was the one who John the Baptist was referring to, and either it got edited out of the Scriptures that he used fire to baptize, or
- Sola Scriptura adherents are not Christians because they not only deny the requirement elsewhere in scripture to baptize with water, and to baptize with fire.
E
EdOsiecki
Guest
Hi jIhagus Thanks for your reply. How can we be united with Christ in baptism, as you say, when baptism does not atone for sins? John makes it very clear Mat 3:11 that he baptizes with water for repentance. Heb 9:22 very clearly states, “without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. That shedding of blood started with Adam & Eve as I mentioned in my reply on post 408… If one is united with Christ per water baptism (there is a Holy Spirit baptism too) why wasn’t Simon in Acts 8:13 united with Christ when he got baptized? He was later rebuked by Peter. The thief on the cross wasn’t baptized yet he was in Christ because of his belief. Why is Paul in Acts 19:4 telling the disciples that John’s baptism is insufficient to be saved? They must be baptized in the Holy Spirit. One can’t be saved without the Holy Spirit . Baptism is a sign of repentance, a turning to God by confessing their sins. But it’s not until one believes in Christ’s shed blood that one is then united with Christ. A person can be baptized many times over and also confess sins to God and still be unsaved. Like Simon wasn’t saved. It’s the belief in Jesus that saves. When the jailor asked Paul how can he be saved? Paul did not say go get baptized, he said believe in Jesus. When the jailor did so, he and his household were then baptized a sign of repentance and their start of a new spiritual life. Cornelius and company got saved by hearing the gospel being preached to them by Peter then later, they got baptized a turning to God. You site 1 Pet 3:21, but v20 must be read in order to get the clear meaning. It speaks about baptism for a good conscience that’s (repentance) but it’s the Resurrection of Jesus that saves. Read the following John 3:16,36; 5:24; Acts 16:31; Rom 1:17;4:5 they say nothing about baptism. Mark 16:16, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” Nowhere does it say,” whoever is not baptized will be condemned.” One must believe followed by baptism for repentance” Do you agree? ED O.
F
Filioque
Guest
Well Ed O:
The only thing I see in your posts are just not convincing to me. They quote Scripture out of not just literary, but historical context.
My primary reason for this post is that I answered your question to me about the Purification of Mary, and the Ransom of Jesus, (Ransom of the First Born). you insisted on a reply from me, as to if I agreed with you, yet you have not replied to my statements. Either you agree or still have questions.
Among the problems I see with your postings are you have been spoon fed select verses of Scripture that seem to prove your Protestant point of view, without understanding the Scriptures in context. Not simply to what they say in the english translation, but what they mean in the context of the original semetic praxis of the time. You equate from a faulty english translation that the Purification offering for Mary was due to her SIN. While turtle doves could be offered as a SIN offering, they were also, if you read the hebrew an offering for ritual purification which can be in part as a result of sin, (spilling ones seed) or from natural events that are not sinful, ie accidentally touching something a woman touched during her period, or a woman after she has given live birth. So please do let me know if this helps your quandry, or if you still attach yourself to the Protestant misunderstanding of jewish law and practice.
P
pipper
Guest
So sorry but I am not Ed O.
I really think from his Polish name that he was once a Catholic, saw the “error of his Catholic ways” and “got saved”. Now he has the obligation to get the rest of us out of the Church so we can “get saved” like he did. That’s a huge obligation for an Evangelical.
I too have been responding to him for some time, and he has taken to ignoring me as well.
It is very obvious that he has no clue about Judaism and it’s connection to Christianity, or indeed any clue about true Christianity.
He is indeed spouting the standard Evangelical/Pentcostal things he gets from his “preachers” and E/P web sites.
I will give him this, he is very persistent with those he thinks he might have a chance at proselytising.
M
Mickey
Guest
So you think that the Scriptural evidence of baptizing whole households does not include infants?
Our modern world so exults reason and cerebralism that young children are sometimes treated as not fully human, or are at least treated less seriously than adults because they can’t think like we do. The truth is that a child is a full human being. A child of any age is capable of expressing and participating in the glory of God. Christ Himself sanctified every age as God-bearing, since He was as much the perfect Word of God as an infant as when He was a grown man. We must remember that children are not second-class persons. Their baptisms are as significant to them and to God as adult baptisms. Even if they do not cognitively understand what that baptism means, they are certainly capable of intuitively understanding it.
antiochian.org/node/16904
Z
Zundrah
Guest
Jesus christ wasn’t baptized until he was around the age of 30.
Let’s word it differently, children would be better off being baptized later on in life when they can understand and say; “Jesus Christ is my saviour and lord.” Baptizing an infant is no different to baptizing an anthiest. The two don’t believe in God or Christ or even the trinity.
F
Filioque
Guest
And what baptism was Jesus baptized into?
Class? Can you say the Baptism of John??? While the Mikvah may have been a foreshadowing to the baptism of Christ, and may have been part of the ritual life of Jews (which is still practiced by observant Jews today) the Baptism of Jesus takes the old rite to a different level. Just as the Pach, in which the lamb is slaughtered takes on new meaning at the Last Supper and the Cross. For those who hold the ancient belief of the Apostles also the Mass.
H
hosemonkey
Guest
Zundrah,
You claim to be “Methodist/Catholic”. Which is it? Your position on baptism is protestant, but you quote from the Rosary at the bottom of your posts. You cannot espouse protestantism and Catholicism at the same time. They are simply in opposition to one another.
You claim to be “Methodist/Catholic”. Which is it? Your position on baptism is protestant, but you quote from the Rosary at the bottom of your posts. You cannot espouse protestantism and Catholicism at the same time. They are simply in opposition to one another.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
…baptism is at its best when the one being baptized is able to believe and say that Christ is their Lord and Saviour.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
This is not entirely true. Yes, perhaps my bible interpritations are of the methodist doctrine but that doesn’t not really change much about my belief in the one and only catholic church.
H
hosemonkey
Guest
Then you may NOT pick and choose. Have the courage to be wholly Catholic.
R
rinnie
Guest
Ed How can a infant confess a sin they did not commit. How Ed can you confess original sin? You do not confess original sin, you don’t have to. Original sin has been paid for by the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross. He took care of that for us.
Actual sin is what we must confess. By being baptised that wipes out original sin. By confessing and repenting that wipes out actual sin.
Think of the lesson there, Adam and Eve did not get thrown out of Eden for Sin, they got thrown out for not repenting. Now God took care of that. He paid and repented for the sin of Adam and Eve.
Now think about it, that’s gone. Now are you going to confess and repent your sin today, or be like Adam and Eve and blame God. See what I mean?
We are born into original sin, a infant cannot repent, so what does the parent do, the parent gets the Child Baptised like Christ said. Baptism wipes out original sin. Its really easy if you think about it.
Does baptism wipe out actual sin. NOPE Confession and Repentance does. Its quite simple again.
A child is inocent so Christ who was also inocent paid for the sin or Adam and Eve.
But when you get to the age of understanding your sins are held against you.
So theres the answer folks. Why baptise a child, easy because you want original sin wiped away and only Baptism can do it. Its only hard to understand if you make it hard to understand.
So was God unfair to a Child, No Way, He offers Baptism to them as soon as they come into this world. Saves them from the get go. Then all they must do is learn his commandments and obey them. Sounds pretty fair to me.
Where did you ever hear from the moment Christ came into this world that a Apostle or Priest refused Baptism to a child. You didn’t, Because God took care of the Children.
What did God say. LET THE CHILDREN COME TO ME!
Z
Zundrah
Guest
I am not picking or chosing! Let me explain a bit more; I am catholic, my church is catholic, but I still use the old methodist ways, that by the way do not contradict catholicism. So I am catholic and not methodist (just not comfirmed to my church yet).
F
Filioque
Guest
Baptism is at it’s best… ???
Either the Sacraments are instituted by Christ and carry with them the Graces He gave them, or they don’t. Unless of course you want to deny the Catholic position that the primary sources of Grace in the Sacraments are from Jesus, and not the officiant or one who receives them. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to make the Graces infused at baptism vary depending on the understanding and faith of the recipient.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
What does the Catholic church teach about infant baptism?
R
rinnie
Guest
Zun think what you are saying. You are saying that its better to let a child live with the sin of original sin. Where you can have that wiped out from the get go.
Then think about this, WHy would you not only want that taken away, but why would you want a child to wait to have the GRACE that is poured into that Child at Baptism.
Baptism is the pouring of Grace. Its the seed of GOD. Why not let that seed grow and grow from birth. I mean why would you want your child to wait to have the gift of Gods Grace, Do you see what I mean. Think of it Zun, what is grace, Grace is God entering you.
H
hosemonkey
Guest
The Catholic Church teaches us that it is necessary to baptize our children as soon as possible , to wipe out the effects of Original sin and to welcome them into the Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself. If you are Catholic, you must aceed to this teaching. Even Methodists appearently believe in infant baptism, so why state that it is better to wait until a person can assent to baptism?
- Status