Baptism of babies & infants

[tweetymom]

Tweetymom, stay away from Sola Scriptura, but DO brush up on Spellchecker.

And you Sir are very rude So thank you for pointing out my mispelling:thumbsup:

 

[po18guy]

Tweetymom, stay away from Sola Scriptura, but DO brush up on Spellchecker.

I was also going to mention the bible, since I could never find Acts 43 and 44, or 11 Timothy.

 

[tweetymom]

Nobody is saying that Ed is a jerk. No one needs to point that out. Jerkness (Jerkness? Is that a word? Guess it is now) is self-manifested. I’m glad that YOU don’t think that Ed is a jerk, You are not like others. It’s good that we have good people like you to point out the shortcomings of us mortals.
But seriously, your positions sound very protestant, are you sure that you didn’t run up the wrong flag? I would hate to fire on friendly forces.

Thankl you no I do run up the right flag I am a Catholic that reads and believes in the Bible , Hey and all the fire you can send certainly doesn 't come from friendly forces not here

 

[guanophore]

I mean the same thing Catholics mean when they refer to “my religion”.

No. The only reason you know that any of us here are Catholic is because it is posted by our username in the banner. At this time of this writing, you have listed no affiliation. Therefore, we really cannot know anything about your religion.

 

[tweetymom]

No. The only reason you know that any of us here are Catholic is because it is posted by our username in the banner. At this time of this writing, you have listed no affiliation. Therefore, we really cannot know anything about your religion.

At the time I didn’t know to do it but I am a Bible believing Catholic:thumbsup:

 

[aliciar]

What are the most common non-Catholic objections to the baptism of infants?

Well, for me, I live where the majority are Mormons. They claim that babies are too young and they haven’t sinned so they don’t baptize until they are 8.

I’ve tried explaining about original sin.

 

[hosemonkey]

I am not ashamed of my faith sir and I am a Catholic who choses to read the Bible. No I will have Jesue in my next life I don’t need you to feed me anything sir. One more question if reading and beleiving in Scripture is not where it’s at, why is it read at Mass everyday:thumbsup:

We all read the Bible, we all hear the Bible read at Mass, no argument. We, as Catholics, simply do not believe that the Bible alone is the complete Rule and Guide of our faith. Scripture, AND the infallible Magisterium of the Church, THAT is the Rule and Guide of our Faith. That is the subject under discussion here, wether Ed has the power to interpret Scripture himself, Scripture ALONE, regarding the necessity of baptism. He says he can, we say he cannot authoritively, interpret Scripture. Full stop. He is wrong, we, as Catholics, are correct. Full stop. Any other point of view, is protestant, and heresy. If you cannot subscribe to that, then you need to become some variety of protestant. There it is.

 

[tweetymom]

At the time I didn’t know to do it but I am a Bible believing Catholic:thumbsup:

And the word Catholic is right beside my name and where I live

 

[kcmekim]

My beard being officially plucked by a “brother” in Christ, I shall point out that what they are called matters not one whit. The fact that they have zero authority behind them, and a date of inception that is nearly 1600 years beyond the Apostles matters a lot.

Actually, they do have authority behind them. We Baptists believe that the word of God is authoritative.

The fact that such beliefs suddenly popped up in Christianity at such a late date matters a lot.

You keep saying that, but you don’t explain when those verses suddenly “popped up” or why the Council at Nicea, which you are constantly bragging was a Catholic authority, recognized them as inspired.

The fact that they are based on the man-made non-foundation of sola scriptura matters a lot. The fact that they are not absolutely binding on the admittedly widely varied Baptist world matters a lot. The fact that other denominations of Baptists have the authority to alter or change them into their own versions matters a lot.

OK. First, if your claim is that they are not binding, then could you please show some evidence to support that claim?

Second, if your claim is that “other denominations of Baptists have the authority to alter or change them into their own version”, do you have any examples of Baptist denominations that have “altered them or changed them into their own version”?

The fact that they are not consistent with the long-held readings of scripture matters a lot. The fact that you and I can come up with just as many “Distinctives” matters a lot.

How are they not consistent?

The only “Distinctive” thing that I see is that their foundation is sand.

And therein lies the difference between us: while you may believe that the word of God is sand, we believe that it is the authoritative word of God.

Love calls you to the fulness of truth, which is in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church funded by Jesus Christ upon the Apostle Peter - unless you have a problem with denying yourself, taking up your cross and following Jesus all the way. If one is comfortable with all of his faith’s teachings, they cannot be the truth.

Thank you, but I’m perfectly fine in the church founded by Christ and on Christ.

You came to a Catholic site. You are going to receive industrial strength Catholicism.

It isn’t the Catholicism I have a problem with. It’s your obnoxiousness and rudeness and constant unfounded claims. Funny, but I’ve met plenty of Catholics who are able to defend Catholicism rationally and respectfully. I don’t understand why you find it so difficult.

 

[guanophore]

OK.

1. Please give one example of me trying to present the Gospel at all since I’ve been here.
2. Please explain how the Gospel that I do preach, when I actually do preach the Gospel, meets the Biblical standard of “another Gospel”.

You just gave one a few posts up, where you claimed that your authority comes from “the word of God and not any man”. This is bogus, since authority only can come from God Himself, not a book, and Jesus gave authority to persons, not writings, however, holy.

Rejecting the baptism of infants consitutes a departure from what the Apostles taught

The standard of the True Gospel does not come from the Scripture. The True Gospel was entrusted by Christ to the Apostles, and was whole and entire before a word of the NT was ever written. The NT reflects what they believed, but it not the Source of it.

You have wandered along 2000 years after the fact, claiming that you can extract the truth of what the Apostles believed and taught from the scriptures, and create a “standard” that you call 'biblical" that departs from what they taught their disciples. That, my friend, is a different gospel.

 

[tweetymom]

Actually, they do have authority behind them. We Baptists believe that the word of God is authoritative.

You keep saying that, but you don’t explain when those verses suddenly “popped up” or why the Council at Nicea, which you are constantly bragging was a Catholic authority, recognized them as inspired.

OK. First, if your claim is that they are not binding, then could you please show some evidence to support that claim?

Second, if your claim is that “other denominations of Baptists have the authority to alter or change them into their own version”, do you have any examples of Baptist denominations that have “altered them or changed them into their own version”?

How are they not consistent?

And therein lies the difference between us: while you may believe that the word of God is sand, we believe that it is the authoritative word of God.

Thank you, but I’m perfectly fine in the church founded by Christ and on Christ.

It isn’t the Catholicism I have a problem with. It’s your obnoxiousness and rudeness and constant unfounded claims. Funny, but I’ve met plenty of Catholics who are able to defend Catholicism rationally and respectfully. I don’t understand why you find it so difficult.

You are so right I have found most threads to be the same way. I am a Catholic and I will try to defend it in a kind way and God Bless

 

[po18guy]

To whom it may pertain: Hey, it’s OK if you voted for O****. Even though doing so would cause a necessary amount of subsequent guilt, there is no reason to then impersonate a thread moderator and begin, praying mantis-style, to eat your own. Just as Baptism is a Sacrament, so also is Reconciliation.

 

[guanophore]

If my beliefs, as say say. are hundred years old, they then must be correct because you claim that yours are 2,000 years old. Correct?

No. The length of time something is believed is not the standard of truth. People believed the earth was flat for a long time, too, and that the sun revolved around the earth. The standard is the Source of the belief. Yours comes from modern innovations. The Catholic one comes from the Apostles.

AND MY RESPONSE TO YOU IS, 1Cor 2:15, BUT THE SPIRITUAL MAN HAS INSIGHT INTO EVERYTHING, AND THAT BOTHERS AND BAFFLES THE MAN OF THE WORLD.“

is that why you are here at CAF, Ed? Are you here to try to enlighten us poor darkened Catholics because you have insight into everything, and we are just too bothered and baffled to figure it out?

Do you realize that CAF is not a venue for you to evangelize Catholics into “bible christians”?

Quote by ED:
v37 says they were cut to heart by the message (of the cross) that Peter preached. v41 those who accepted that message were baptized. In simple English they believed on Jesus to forgive their sins not the water in baptism.

I’M NOT MAKING ANYTHING UP. YOU DON’T GET RIGHTEOUSNESS FROM WATER BAPTISM. 2 Cor.5:21, FOR HE (GOD) HATH MADE HIM (CHRIST) TO BE SIN FOR US, WHO KNEW NO SIN; THAT WE MIGHT BE MADE THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD IN HIM.

Baptism is when we are joined with Christ in His death and resurrection. We are clothed with Christ. This is not done by the water, but by the HS, who makes us members of Him in baptism. I think you have a hard time grasping this because your spiritual ancestors separated the HS from the water. The Apostles never did that.

Quote by ED:
In Acts 10:43, "All the prophets testify about Him that everyone who believes in HIM, receives FORGIVENESS of sins through His name. v44 'While Peter was still speaking these words, the HOLY SPIRIT came on all who heard the MESSAGE.

IT MOST CERTAINLY IS IN THE BIBLE! I COPIED ACTS 10:43-44, WORD FOR WORD EXACTLY AS IT APPEARS IN THE BIBLE. DON’T YOU READ THE BIBLE?

This is the standard for Adult baptism. Adults are given the gospel message, and believe, make a profession of faith, and enter the waters of baptism.

Quote by ED:
Cornelius and all present had their sins forgiven, received the Holy Spirit and became born again WITHOUT baptism. Where they later baptized? Yes! but not for the reason you that think to have their sins forgiven, they did it as an act of repentance as God commands.

It is all of the above. Jesus did this with the household of Cornelius to convince Peter not to call common what God had declared clean. The reason Peter immediately ordered baptism is because Peter understood that baptism should not be separated from the actions of the HS.

 

[kcmekim]

Decrying the Baptism of the young, contrary to the original and authoritative interpretation of scripture as well as the history of the Church from day one - Baptism being the first physical/spiritual act of initiation into Christ’s Church.

Actually, that isn’t what the Bible refers to when it talks about those who preach another Gospel. If you’re going to use Biblical language and imagery, then you have a responsibility to apply Biblical definitions to that language.

The “bible alone” gospel is, indeed another gospel, as it denies the authority of the Church that Christ founded

First of all, I have explained to you over and over that we do not believe in “Bible alone” so for you to continue to insist that we do is simply being dishonest on your part.

Second, it isn’t another Gospel because it a Gospel at all.

Third, we do not deny the authority of the church at all. In fact, I have already explained to you over and over that we have numerous creeds, confessions, and catechisms, all authoritative words from the church precisely because we DO defer to the authority of the church. It isn’t the authority of the church that we deny at all, but the supremecy of the church over the word of God. God’s word is the authority over the church and the church, when acting in submission and obedience to God’s word is the authority over us.

it diminishes or denies that the Holy Spirit was given to a Church, and not a bible.

I would strongly encourage you to read 2 Tim 3. It explains that the Holy Spirit did, indeed, give us the Bible.

The bible is no authority.

And the fact that you do not believe that God’s word is authoritative is precisely why I will never be a Catholic.

It testifies to authority, but has none of its own.

1 Tim 3:16-17 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

1 Cor 14:37 If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.

Words (and that’s all the bible is without proper interpretation), can be twisted to mean anything.

Kind of like how “brothers” really means “cousins”.

Remember also that the serpent is the most subtle of the creatures. He does not mislead with gross error, but with tiny, almost imperceptible lies. God’s word needs proper interpretation.

Agreed. We are commanded to rightly divide the word of truth

 

[kcmekim]

No. The only reason you know that any of us here are Catholic is because it is posted by our username in the banner. At this time of this writing, you have listed no affiliation. Therefore, we really cannot know anything about your religion.

That’s funny, because I’ve stated that I’m a fundamentalist Baptist several times and several of your fellow Catholics have tried to lecture me on what we “really believe”.

 

[po18guy]

kcmekim:
We have wandered far off topic. Please start a thread in the non-Catholic religions forum. That way, you can lead by laying down Baptist thoughts on faith.

We have beaten a dead horse here.

 

[tweetymom]

We have wandered far off topic. Please start a thread in the non-Catholic religions forum. That way, you can lead by laying down Baptist thoughts on faith.

We have beaten a dead horse here.

Amen to that and there is a thread about non Catholics

 

[po18guy]

That’s funny, because I’ve stated that I’m a fundamentalist Baptist several times and several of your fellow Catholics have tried to lecture me on what we “really believe”.

Do you believe what this “Fundamentalist Baptist” page declares to be true about the Catholic Church?

baptistcatholic.com/

 

[po18guy]

And the fact that you do not believe that God’s word is authoritative is precisely why I will never be a Catholic.

Sorry. I was referring to the bible by itself here. Relax! Does the bible need proper interpretation?

 

[kcmekim]

Sorry. I was referring to the bible by itself here. Relax! Does the bible need proper interpretation?

Same answer I gave you last time, including the Bible verse I cited. What part of “Agreed. We are commanded to rightly divide the word of truth” did you not understand?