Baptism

[Philthy]

Hi outdave! Keep pressing with an open heart to what you believe God is calling you to do. I will not judge you.

oudave:

Two things here, First of all you are assuming that where ever it says household or all his family, that there were children present.

It doesn’t say in Scripture so we are left guessing despite the alleged clarity of Scripture. It is not illogical to assume that since the gift was for “you and your children” that children were meant to be included, and it is also not illogical to believe that in households prior to reliable birth control that there would be not children however this also is not a “proof” and simply reflects the unclarity of Scripture.

oudave:

Acts 2:38 says Repent and be Baptized, can a child repent?

He isn’t talking to children, he’s talking to adults so it doesn’t really apply.

oudave:

does a child even know what repent means? adults cant even get it right. The maturity level of children are different, some understand at 5 years old and some not till 10 or 12. Ask a child why they were baptized and most will tell you because my mom and dad had me Baptized or the church says I’m supposed to.

Children don’t understand very much at age 5, and you(and I)understand less of how to judge their understanding. Essentially, the concept of “understanding” is again meant for adults. Jesus did say not to prevent infants from coming to him - he didn’t say don’t bother they are already mine. There is a difference.

oudave:

And no I don’t believe that if a child who has not been baptized dies go’s to hell.

Why not simply shoot them first and send them immediately to God before they have a chance of sinning? Seems kind of selfish on your part. I guess maybe because that would be a sin on your part? But then again if you are born again and your salvation is assured then you have Christ’s righteousness on your side and all’s well. I hope you know I’m not serious, but this type of theology can and has led people to do exactly that.

oudave:

If you were 4 years old and broke out your neibors window they don’t throw you in jail for vandelism, because you are not yet of responsible age.

Invalid analogy. You never finished the story - as if no one pays for the window! Who pays for the window? Probably your parents who are responsible for your behavior. How does one apply this analogy to baptism? IF you are prepared to assign the guilt of the child to the parents then you are not too far from assigning the faith of the parents(or the Church) to the child through baptism.

oudave:

Two of my children were ready at 9 and the other at 11 years. Our confirmation come’s when we profess our faith in Christ, We are then Baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

That’ll do it, “ready” or not!

oudave:

You say that infant Baptism washes away original sin, I believe that it is the blood of Christ that washes away sin.

Firstly, you have dodged the point in an attempt to make a point. The point is that we are all born with original sin through the fall and that sin needs to be washed. We all understand the significance of Christs blood. But what we are now discussing is the concept of baptism achieving that spiritual washing for infants.

Now with respect to your statement regarding “the blood of Christ” -you are mistaken - sort of. You have no access to the “blood” of Christ nor does anyone else in the sense that you mean it(Catholics of course believe in the Real Presence in the eucharist and have access - off topic!) What you are trying to say is that Christ’s blood from the Crucifixion is the CAUSE and justification for sins being washed - we all agree with that. But a problem immediately arises if we leave the implications of your thought unaddressed: namely, that if Christ’s blood washed away all sins 2000 years ago then we are ALL saved. I don’t think you would agree with that. But that is different than the MEANS of how that event 2000 years ago is APPLIED to our lives today. Baptism is one MEANS for the application of Christ’s righteousness( in Catholic and various Protestan theology). Faith is a prerequisite for this in adults, but is not for those incapable of faith(infant).

Thanks for your thoughts-

Phil

 

[Philthy]

Hi Dave-

oudave:

I totaly disagree with you, catholics as a whole are not encouraged to read the Bible.

I understand why you say this, but it’s not true. Most “Catholics” in the US, during our lifetime, etc. don’t actually read the bible like you and I do, but that has nothing to do with what the Church teaches. In addition, the Bible is read during Mass multiple times. An OT reading, A NT reading, A Gospel, Several Psalms etc each and every Mass and it is different each and every time until virtually all of Scripture has been read. a gospel account of the Last Supper is also read each and every Mass.

oudave:

My wife comes from a long line of catholics, from a large family. We have had many conversations about the subject. Her family call’s us Bible thumpers, I wear that label proudly. The leaders of the catholic church remind me so much of the pharasees written in scripture. I consider them to be the wolves that are leading the church astray.

Leaders of the Church? Who are you talking about? And don’t forget, JESUS told the people to “do whatever they tell you” regarding the pharisees but “do not do as they do.” How are you modeling this?

oudave:

Following the Bible only does not sound like being carried about by every wind of doctrine to me.
Now i will give you a short analogy.
Remember when your teacher would tell the first student in a row a story, he was then told to pass it back, by the time it reached the other side of the room. the last student’s story was way different than the first. Thats what has happened to the catholic church, things have been changed so much that its way off base.
That is why we Bible thumpers are so adement to the Bible only teaching’s.

You obviously have no concept of what has happened in the Church as a result of “bible only” christians. For 1000 years there was only 1 Church, and it was known as the Catholic Church. In the early 2nd millenium a split occured and the “Orthodox” churches had some issues with authority. Essentially ALL the theology remained intact, simply the question of authority is differed upon. For another 500 years there are just these division of the Church. Now introduce Luther, Calvin, etc in the early 17th century to the Church and out of this is spawned the concept of “Sola Scriptura” and from that time onward, the Church has been split into thousands of different “denominations” - repeatedly. All adhereing to the “bible only” concept, yet all arriving at different places. It has resulted in so many theological dissents that they are numbered in the THOUSANDS. And they are all firmly convinced that they are doing the right thing.
So divisive is the “bible only” body that they can only really agree on some very basic concepts:

• Jesus is God (there are some dissenters)
• Salvation is through “faith alone” (but what “faith alone” means is totally unclear and how to possibly reconcile that with James Chapter 2 becomes suspiciously inconsistent. Somehow when James says “You see that a man is not save by faith alone…” suddenly Scripture needs “explaining” as if that statement weren’t clear enough.
• The bible is our sole rule of faith - even though it says to "hold fast to… tradition…by word of mouth and doesnt go on to explain what that means. And even though 2Tim 3:16 is the best verse for supporting Sola Scriptura it ignores that Paul was writing to Timothy in his first letter to tell him how to “act” in the “Church of the living God which is the pillar and foundation of truth.” And Paul writes these instructions to Tim EVEN THOUGH he acknowledges that Timothy has known all of Scripture since his childhood. Obviously Paul didn’t think a knowledge of scripture alone was good enough.

And that is about it for all the agreement based on bible only. If you think I’m mistaken then I’ll issue a challenge: give me 5 christian beliefs which influence your life and which aren’t included above and we’ll post 'em independently on a Protestant web site and see how much “unity” there is.
Listen to what Luther had to say:
“I never approved of a schism, nor will I approve of it for all eternity… It is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better."
Do you suppose that the person you got your “bilbe only” theology from would approve of where you now worship? I think not - he was more Catholic than anything else.

Just my perspective,

Phil

 

[WhatIf]

Why isn’t oudave posting anything?

I hope he is doing well. I want to hear if your opinion has changed at all regarding infant baptism or Catholics being encouraged to read the Bible. You don’t have any one telling you how “you must” interpret scripture, do you? So it can change from time to time, right? Has it changed on these issues?

 

[Dan_Blake]

gardenswithkids:

My question: WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENS TO CHILDREN WHO DIE BEFORE THEY’RE ABLE TO ACCEPT JESUS AS THEIR PERSONAL LORD AND SAVIOR?

I imagine they would say the same thing Catholics say about children who die before they are baptized. “As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the [character of God allows] us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism (CCC 1261).”

I mean, sometimes children die before the age of reason. Sometimes babies die. It’s very sad. Do you think God rejects them since they were never old enough to accept Him?

It is very sad. With these emotionally tender issues where God is less than explicit, it is best to let God be the righteous judge of eternity.

 

[robertjohn]

It takes very little discernment to know that those who are not Roman Catholic but post on the site to cause Catholics to doubt their faith in Christ and salvation, are NOT of Christ.

Ex-Baptist Deacon

 

[Dan_Blake]

robertjohn:

It takes very little discernment to know that those who are not Roman Catholic but post on the site to cause Catholics to doubt their faith in Christ and salvation, are NOT of Christ.

Ex-Baptist Deacon

Hi Robert (or is it John?),

You gave no quote, so I am unclear to what you are referring. Is it a particular poster or the thread as a whole? Usually when threads get over 100 postings it is because a handful of people are beating a dead horse, and no one is really interested in an exchange of ideas. The fastest way to get ignored is to write a thoughtful posting.

Cheers,
Dan (one ex-Baptist Deacon to another)