Baptism of babies & infants

[hosemonkey]

Thanks RC, adding that verse does indeed make it very clear that children are to be baptised doesn’t it?

But MR ED, will probably come up with a way to “explain that away” as well.

It is quite obvious that “Mr. Ed” is a protestant that claims to have been raised a Catholic and who must now display his rebellion by finding “flaws” in Catholic doctrine and practice. More than likely he was poorly catechised or perhaps was asleep when these doctrines were taught. It is usually poorly catechised or ignorant former “Catholics” who take the bait of protestanism and turn on the Church that raised them. He may be unaware that one who has been taught the truths of Catholicism and rejects them, is in danger of hellfire. They attempt to pit their scant knowledge of Scripture against the Church that Christ founded and who has cherished and guarded His teachings for nearly two thousand years. It is like the flea climbing the elephant’s leg with intentions of conquest. He is not here to inquire, but instead is here to debate things of which he has little knowledge. He innocently poses leading questions, but argues the answers. By all means explain correct doctrine to him, but if he persists in his error, ignore him.

 

[pipper]

It is quite obvious that “Mr. Ed” is a protestant that claims to have been raised a Catholic and who must now display his rebellion by finding “flaws” in Catholic doctrine and practice. More than likely he was poorly catechised or perhaps was asleep when these doctrines were taught. It is usually poorly catechised or ignorant former “Catholics” who take the bait of protestanism and turn on the Church that raised them. He may be unaware that one who has been taught the truths of Catholicism and rejects them, is in danger of hellfire. They attempt to pit their scant knowledge of Scripture against the Church that Christ founded and who has cherished and guarded His teachings for nearly two thousand years. It is like the flea climbing the elephant’s leg with intentions of conquest. He is not here to inquire, but instead is here to debate things of which he has little knowledge. He innocently poses leading questions, but argues the answers. By all means explain correct doctrine to him, but if he persists in his error, ignore him.

I dont know if “Mr Ed”, user name Ed Oiseki (or very simular was raised Catholic or not) but the names does suggest strongly that has was Polish Catholic.

He refuses to indicate what demonination he is in now, it says (etc) in the headers to his posts.

He has also posted on the “catholic interpretation of Revelation” thread giving anything but the Catholic Interpretation. Honestly from the stuff he has put on the Revelation thread it would seem that he’s a little off balance, the stuff there by him sounds a whole lot like what my paranoid-schizophenic half-brother would say. (I am first generation Catholic being raised by divorced and “re-married” Protestants)

I am hoping that the may be gone for good, esp since I told him he is in violation of CAF’s terms of service. He is proslytizing after all, not dialoging with us Catholics but laying down his etc law to us.

 

[EdOsiecki]

So just hearing by itself washes away sins, you are kidding right? You obvously have pre-concieved notions about everything, which begs the point why are you here,certainly not to learn Catholic ideas on Catholic Answers .com.

It appears to me personally that you are here to proselytise Catholics away form Catholicicsm to your one-man band church of etcettera. You are in violatation of CAs TOS (rules) in case you are unaware,but I am sure you don’t care so long as you can try and “save” us.

Now I am going to type Acts 2:38 since you don’t seem to belive the words of the bible or try to “explain them away”, for they are as plain as the nose on your face, you just chose not to beleive them since they contradict your pre-concived notion.

'Then Peter said to them, “Repent and let everyone of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF YOUR SINS; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”

That is from the New King James Bible that you may be more familiar with than any Catholic bible.

One other thing, if you are going to reply then reply to ALL that I have said, if you choose to edit my posts, as you have consistently, then don’t even bother to respond, you will notice that I have responded to all that you have said without snipping, please do me the same courtesy. Not only are your breaking the site rules by proselytizing, you are are also breaking common courtesy by snipping what I have to say.

One more request, please identify the denomination or “non-denomination” you belong to. ETC tells us absolutely nothing.

Thanks for reply but please don’t get impatient and accuse me of all sorts of things. If this is a forum in which we are to learn the correct meaning to the Scriptures what makes you so sure that you know them all. Show me where I have snipped at you and I’ll apologize If I have offended you. What diference does it make about my denomination, we are discussing Scriptures aren’t we. I tried to show you in Acts 2:38 that in order to get the full meaning of what’s being said there you must continue unto verse 41. I tried to explain to you that John says he water baptizes for REPENTANCE. Now compare what John states in John 1:29, The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, " Look the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world". By that statement John knows that his baptism doesn’t wash away sins. In Acts 2:38, it also states you will received the Holy Spirit. John also states in verse 33"-------The man (Jesus) on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is He who will baptize with the Holy Spirit. So the holy Spirit is not received at water baptism. Although it seems to imply that it does in Acts 2:38. That’s why in reading the Bible you have to consider other Scriptures in order to get the true meaning. Now go the Acts 19:2-6, Paul asks if the disciples received the Holy Spirit. They haven’t heard of it. Now Paul makes it very clear in verse 4,“John’s baptism was a baptism of REPENTANCE” Paul tells them they must believe on Jesus to receive the Holy Spirit. Paul then laid hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit. Now go to Acts 8:12 Philip preached the gospel, people believed it and were water baptized. But Acts 8:16 states " the holy spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of Jesus". verse 17 When Peter and John laid hands on them they received the Holy Spirit". It’s the belief in Jesus that washes away sins. That’s why He shed His blood at the cross. To atone for (wash away) our sins. Hebrews 9:22 states, “Without the shedding of Blood there is NO REMISSION OF SINS”. Now Think! If water could wash away sins, there would not have been any reason for Jesus to shed His blood on the cross. Everything I have written here is not of my opinion, but all Scripture. ED O.

 

[YADA]

Getting back to the various scriptures that state that entire households we baptized [like the household of Cornelious]…

Of course infants, small children and older children could be present and obviously were then baptized …

We forget that these “households” also included servants, slaves and others who where in someway not able or allowed to make their own decision ‘not’ to consent to baptism …

We see in the institution of the jewish covenant established and ritualized through circumcision that entire households were circumcised [initially] primarily adults.

These adults included those who could freely chose to follow the Lord God like Abraham but the command was also to circumcize ALL: Servants, Captives, and Slaves be they adults, youth or children … after this all the males were to be circumcised on the eigth day …

Circumcision prefigures baptism … so the head of the household [like Cornelious and others] made a decision that their households [in entirety] would serve the Lord, all therein: Adults, children, slave and free persons, indentured or not.

With all respect to Reverend Kevin and others. It is a new fangled idea that we let our children experience the pagan society and let them choose to be Christian or not … We do not let them decide whether they are members of the family or not, to attend school or not, eat vegetables or not …

Entire households means all that reside inside… and lacking a specific instruction to exclude those under the authority of the Head of the Household - all must have been dully 'washed and born from above" …

 

[EdOsiecki]

Thanks RC, adding that verse does indeed make it very clear that children are to be baptised doesn’t it?

But MR ED, will probably come up with a way to “explain that away” as well.

Thanks for your reply Pipper. I’m amazed at you and now two or three others on this forum how critical you all are of me. But isn’t a forum such as this supposed to be a discussion of Scriptures. If it’s not than what is its purpose? ED O.

 

[pipper]

Thanks for reply but please don’t get impatient and accuse me of all sorts of things. If this is a forum in which we are to learn the correct meaning to the Scriptures what makes you so sure that you know them all. Show me where I have snipped at you and I’ll apologize If I have offended you. What diference does it make about my denomination, we are discussing Scriptures aren’t we. I tried to show you in Acts 2:38 that in order to get the full meaning of what’s being said there you must continue unto verse 41. I tried to explain to you that John says he water baptizes for REPENTANCE. Now compare what John states in John 1:29, The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, " Look the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world". By that statement John knows that his baptism doesn’t wash away sins. In Acts 2:38, it also states you will received the Holy Spirit. John also states in verse 33"-------The man (Jesus) on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is He who will baptize with the Holy Spirit. So the holy Spirit is not received at water baptism. Although it seems to imply that it does in Acts 2:38. That’s why in reading the Bible you have to consider other Scriptures in order to get the true meaning. Now go the Acts 19:2-6, Paul asks if the disciples received the Holy Spirit. They haven’t heard of it. Now Paul makes it very clear in verse 4,“John’s baptism was a baptism of REPENTANCE” Paul tells them they must believe on Jesus to receive the Holy Spirit. Paul then laid hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit. Now go to Acts 8:12 Philip preached the gospel, people believed it and were water baptized. But Acts 8:16 states " the holy spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of Jesus". verse 17 When Peter and John laid hands on them they received the Holy Spirit". It’s the belief in Jesus that washes away sins. That’s why He shed His blood at the cross. To atone for (wash away) our sins. Hebrews 9:22 states, “Without the shedding of Blood there is NO REMISSION OF SINS”. Now Think! If water could wash away sins, there would not have been any reason for Jesus to shed His blood on the cross. Everything I have written here is not of my opinion, but all Scripture. ED O.

I should not respond to you at all, for you continue to snip (not snipe) my words to you, If you disagre with what I am saying you just leave it all out, which is not only bad wetitqute but dishonst debateing tactics as well.

For example you completly dissregard what I say about the baptism of ST John was completely differerent from Christian baptism, you didn’t like it or dissagreed so you just snip it all out. I refuse to debate with a dishonest snip…er. one who snips. and no this is NOT a forum to ascertain the correct evangelical/fundamental meaning of the scripture, this is a forum to learn the CATHOLIC meaning of scripture. This is CATHOLIC ANSWERS forums, what part of that do you not understand?

This is not a platform for you to proselytise,one more post such as this and I will report you for violation of the terms of service, and you will very likely to be banned from this site.

JUST ONE MORE THING WHAT IN THE WORLD IS A DENOMINATION, OR "NON DENOMINATION CALLED (ETC)?

I will tell you once more, if you wish to debate with me, then kindly qoute ALL I have to say that you are responding to. One more snip and all you will hear from me is zzzzzzz.
Right before I turn you in.

PS St John never “Water” baptised anyone, that must be your Pentecostal (etc) poking it’s head up. But St John the baptiser never Christian baptised anyone, he was of the Jewish religion. “Water” baptism is the only baptism their is, were you thinking some people baptise with beer, or Dr. Pepper?

 

[pipper]

Thanks for your reply Pipper. I’m amazed at you and now two or three others on this forum how critical you all are of me. But isn’t a forum such as this supposed to be a discussion of Scriptures. If it’s not than what is its purpose? ED O.

The purpose of this forum (Catholic Answers) is for people who want to ask questions about the Faith to ask them, and for Catholics to answer them.

 

[rev_kevin]

Well Sinamet is like levadopa with bufferins added, it is not supposed to upset your stomach like levadopa. I always heard that levadopa is the med of choice for Parkinsons.

But I always say “why mess with success”. If the Reqiup works for you why change ?

This is my non-professional, non-doctors advice for you

Thanks. Like I said I might ask my doctor to try Sinament again Its been about 8 years since I used it. But I’ll keave that up to him.

 

[Bill_Pick]

If your saying what I think you mean and that is: Peter started the Catholic church and later he merged them all into one Roman Catholic Church.

No I was talking about Baptism & infants but you are right about the Church and Peter Mt 16:18-19 and 1 Tim 3:15

 

[rev_kevin]

rev Do you think that Our Lord come to the world to satrted a Church or did He come to start s Church,and why does He say the Church is the Pillar of Truth,not all churchs can be the right church we can only have one truth and it is the Church started By Jesus Christ. not any of the 26,000others/ THE CATHLOIC CHURCH IS THE ONLY CHURCH STARTED BY OUR LORD.

What does this have to do with what I said? If you believe the Catholic church is the true church so be it. I don’t so why are you making such a big deal out of it. You can’t specificily point to were it says the Catholic church. You say his church is the pillar of truth not all churches can be right. You can not point out that the catholic church is the true church. Tell me were the Lord or the apostiles said “I COME TO START THE CATHOLIC CHURCH” not the pillar of truth or all that other mumbo jumbo you keep quoting. Show me were it says that the Lord said “I come to start the Catholic church” Show me the word Catholic and not just church. Show me were the Lord says “the only true church is the Catholic church”
Show me these words, these exact words, not truth, church, I want you to show me exactilly were it says the “catholic church.” The word church is too vague, its not specific.

 

[EdOsiecki]

I should not respond to you at all, for you continue to snip (not snipe) my words to you, If you disagre with what I am saying you just leave it all out, which is not only bad wetitqute but dishonst debateing tactics as well.

For example you completly dissregard what I say about the baptism of ST John was completely differerent from Christian baptism, you didn’t like it or dissagreed so you just snip it all out. I refuse to debate with a dishonest snip…er. one who snips. and no this is NOT a forum to ascertain the correct evangelical/fundamental meaning of the scripture, this is a forum to learn the CATHOLIC meaning of scripture. This is CATHOLIC ANSWERS forums, what part of that do you not understand?

This is not a platform for you to proselytise,one more post such as this and I will report you for violation of the terms of service, and you will very likely to be banned from this site.

JUST ONE MORE THING WHAT IN THE WORLD IS A DENOMINATION, OR "NON DENOMINATION CALLED (ETC)?

I will tell you once more, if you wish to debate with me, then kindly qoute ALL I have to say that you are responding to. One more snip and all you will hear from me is zzzzzzz.
Right before I turn you in.

PS St John never “Water” baptised anyone, that must be your Pentecostal (etc) poking it’s head up. But St John the baptiser never Christian baptised anyone, he was of the Jewish religion. “Water” baptism is the only baptism their is, were you thinking some people baptise with beer, or Dr. Pepper?

Thank you for your resonse Pipper. Would you please be so kind and direct me to the post that you mention in your example about St. John’s baptism differs from Christian batism. Honestly I did not intentionally ignore it. Also would you better explain what you are talking about in your PS. Thanks

 

[Bill_Pick]

rev read your Bible and stop being a fool Mt16:18=19===mt 18;17-18 lk 10;16—jn16;;13—1 Tim 3:15 Now if you can not understand ! Tim 3:15 well you do have a problem.

 

[Bill_Pick]

What does this have to do with what I said? If you believe the Catholic church is the true church so be it. I don’t so why are you making such a big deal out of it. You can’t specificily point to were it says the Catholic church. You say his church is the pillar of truth not all churches can be right. You can not point out that the catholic church is the true church. Tell me were the Lord or the apostiles said “I COME TO START THE CATHOLIC CHURCH” not the pillar of truth or all that other mumbo jumbo you keep quoting. Show me were it says that the Lord said “I come to start the Catholic church” Show me the word Catholic and not just church. Show me were the Lord says “the only true church is the Catholic church”
Show me these words, these exact words, not truth, church, I want you to show me exactilly were it says the “catholic church.” The word church is too vague, its not specific.

rev I,ll play along with your ignorance show me from the Bible that Our Lord said Please start 36/000 non-denomination church when I said I will build MY Church MY Church church not 36’000 rev get real and show me from the bible I will build my Baptsm church or my Luther , church He told Peter build My Church ans Peter did just as He said Build My church .you are just showing your ignorance, we only had ONE CHURCH for 1400 years do you think God waite for 1400 years to start His Church and NON_Denomination church did not get here until about 1990 so we know thats not the church, open your eyes and get some comman sence

 

[rev_kevin]

rev I,ll play along with your ignorance show me from the Bible that Our Lord said Please start 36/000 non-denomination church when I said I will build MY Church MY Church church not 36’000 rev get real and show me from the bible I will build my Baptsm church or my Luther , church He told Peter build My Church ans Peter did just as He said Build My church .you are just showing your ignorance, we only had ONE CHURCH for 1400 years do you think God waite for 1400 years to start His Church and NON_Denomination church did not get here until about 1990 so we know thats not the church, open your eyes and get some comman sence

You can’t, can you. You can’t back up your “one Church” quotes. Then inorder to get at me you ask me to show you were it says the same thing. Well guess what I can’t Just like you can’t so there you have it. You can’t prove your right. Besides I never claimed that my church or anyother church was the one true church now did I. Your the one who keeps saying that not me. Now that I proved you can’t really back up your claims you have to resort by saying I’ll play along with your ignorance. Is my ignorance because I don’t see it your way. I agree with you on the “build my church” but it don’t say Peter build my Catholic church" it just says Church. How big of a man are you when you can’t prove your point and must result in saying I’m showing my ignorance. Catholic, Baptist, Non-denom. are words, or names, the true church lives in all of us, in all believers in Christ, those who accept Christ and live according to his word. That’s the true church. Not a name or affiliation.

 

[rev_kevin]

rev read your Bible and stop being a fool Mt16:18=19===mt 18;17-18 lk 10;16—jn16;;13—1 Tim 3:15 Now if you can not understand ! Tim 3:15 well you do have a problem.

Now I went from showing ignorance to being a fool. Are we getting upset. At least I haven’t resorted to name calling or belittling. Such a good Catholic is that also what your belief is in your faith name calling and belittling? Why does the timeline keep changing from 2000 years to 1400 years. Just wondering?
I have as a matter of fact I am doing a sermon on Matthew 17 the transfiguration and the demon possessed boy. See the disciples have been given the authority to do the healing , but they had not yet learned how to appropriate the power of God. Jesus’ frustration is with the unbelieving and unresponsive generation. I believe and have responded???

Matthew 16: 18-19 The rock on which Jesus would build his church has been identified as
1-Jesus himself
2-Peter
3-the confession of faith that Peter gave and that all susequent true believers would give. It seems most likly that the rock refers to Peter as the leader of the church. Just as Peter has revieled the true identity of Christ, so Jesus revealed Peter’s inenity and roll.
All believers are joined into this church by faith in Jesus Christ as Savior.

John 16:13 The truth into which the Holy Spirit guides us is the truth about Christ. The spirit also helps us through patient practice to descern fight fro wrong.

1 Timothy 3:15 The church is the living God. yes the Living God and your point?

Still no Catholic church mentioned here.

Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t this sight about "BAPTISM OF BABIES & INFANTS, not about "WHO STARTED THE CHURCH "or “WHAT THE TRUE CHURCH IS” I’m just saying

 

[placido]

I’m tired and I don’t need this anymore. Its not doing me any good healty wise to stay on this site and get abused. We disagree so let it be.

Rev Kenin, please don’t cry foul. When you came here you knew you were coming to a Catholic forum. You knew beforehand Catholics disagreed with you.

You can tell all your buddies here that they won in there eyes although it was never a fight.

For us it is not about winning. It about sharing the truth.

I simply answered the question asked and this is what happens. Hope your happy now, go and brag and put me down for giving up. Go ahead and make fun of it because it don’t matter anymore. Why go on with anything in life if this is what religion does to people, fight, bicker argue and so on, all because of different views or beliefs. It may not be worth it.

Like I said, you knew Catholics don’t agree with you, but you hoped to find a bunch of now-nothings who would run for cover immediately after your arrival on this forum.

Thanks now because of all this I am questioning my faith in the Lord. If this is how people who claim to be followers of God act then is this the God for me? I don’t know. If I feel this way how can I preach anymore because it would all be a lie, me telling somwone to believe when I am questioning it myself. Like I said I’m tired.

That has always been the danger of sectarianism. People are made to feel confident in their new-found faith, thinking they can easily demolish any Catholic claim – until they eventually encounter Catholics who really know their faith and are determined to defend it. With the lie exposed, those who were once confident in themselves, are in danger of losing faith altogether.

placido

 

[placido]

Why is it necassary to baptize infants? What happens to them should they die unbaptized?

Not so much about what happens to unbaptized infants, but what happens to their parents because of this negligence.
Do you rember what happened to the Israelites after they failed to circumcise their babies?

placido

 

[placido]

In the Bible, Rev. 1:11, states, “Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the SEVEN churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.” Where is the Roman Catholic church? Rev is the last book in the Bible but no Roman Catholic church yet? ED O.

No Romans in your Bible? That is funny … BTW to which of the seven churches on that list do you belong to? And have you noticed that Jerusalem is missing from that list as well?

placido

 

[placido]

Besides I never claimed that my church or anyother church was the one true church now did I.

You don’t believe your church is the one true church, yet you refuse to accept the Catholic claim of being that one true church. So, according to you, Jesus’ one true church doesn’t exist, and/or if that does exist nobody knows where it is. Jesus founded an unknowable true church.

placido

 

[ParkerD]

Not so much about what happens to unbaptized infants, but what happens to their parents because of this negligence.
Do you rember what happened to the Israelites after they failed to circumcise their babies?

placido

Placido,
Do you honestly think that God does His work of faith in the hearts of humankind by threatening parents? The Mosaic law was replaced, not re-established in a new way. The new law was not one of threats of punishment, but of willing hearts doing the will of God because they want to.