Baptism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dokimas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok I see what you are saying. You want the Catholics to be the Duggers with, what is it now 20 children. Be fruitful and multiply we can’t let the non-Catholics take over abolish the true church. Is that what your saying?
Ad hominem attacks on that poster or upon the Church’s position concerning procreation only serve to make you look more painted into a corner on the infant baptism issue than you already are. Just accept the fact that you stand on no venerable scriptural interpretive or traditional ground, and have lost your argument, and move on. We are not offended by your thinly veiled attacks on our culture, which unabashedly celebrates openness to life and children, big families and procreation, motherhood and fatherhood. Using it as an insult just makes you look culturally deprived, and quite frankly, scared of minorities.
 
Ad hominem attacks on that poster or upon the Church’s position concerning procreation only serve to make you look more painted into a corner on the infant baptism issue than you already are. Just accept the fact that you stand on no venerable scriptural interpretive or traditional ground, and have lost your argument, and move on. We are not offended by your thinly veiled attacks on our culture, which unabashedly celebrates openness to life and children, big families and procreation, motherhood and fatherhood. Using it as an insult just makes you look culturally deprived, and quite frankly, scared of minorities.
On the contrary, Kevin has done a good job with his position and he’s done so using and reasoning from the Bible.
 
On the contrary, Kevin has done a good job with his position and he’s done so using and reasoning from the Bible.
Okay, you do realize we have a scroll function and a back button in our browsers, don’t you? Both of you basically just attacked Catholics as being nothing but a bunch of mindless baby machines who don’t preach the gospel to adults. Funny… I am an adult in RCIA right now and converting, thanks to witnessing Catholics. And I have no children. What were the Catholics thinking in trying to brainwash me???
 
Okay, you do realize we have a scroll function and a back button in our browsers, don’t you? Both of you basically just attacked Catholics as being nothing but a bunch of mindless baby machines who don’t preach the gospel to adults. Funny… I am an adult in RCIA right now and converting, thanks to witnessing Catholics. And I have no children. What were the Catholics thinking in trying to brainwash me???

I’m not sure that you’ve understood me and most likely you haven’t understood Kevin. As for my comments, I try to respond with the Bible according to what I’ve understood a poster to have said.​

I’m glad you have the ability to go back and check things out. I hope you make sure you understand what we are saying. As of this comment, I’m not sure you’ve understood.
 

I’m not sure that you’ve understood me and most likely you haven’t understood Kevin. As for my comments, I try to respond with the Bible according to what I’ve understood a poster to have said.​

I’m glad you have the ability to go back and check things out. I hope you make sure you understand what we are saying. As of this comment, I’m not sure you’ve understood.
I live in the state where the Duggars are from and I hear this sort of Catholic bashing (for having so many kids) all the time, so I assure you I’m not having any difficulty understanding. No, I understand the veiled insults just fine, thanks.
 
Okay, you do realize we have a scroll function and a back button in our browsers, don’t you? Both of you basically just attacked Catholics as being nothing but a bunch of mindless baby machines who don’t preach the gospel to adults. Funny… I am an adult in RCIA right now and converting, thanks to witnessing Catholics. And I have no children. What were the Catholics thinking in trying to brainwash me???
The following is copied from my response to JMCRAE
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmcrae
No. I am saying that they are not producing enough Catholic children, and that the non-Catholics are going to outnumber us, eventually.

Doki: [SIGN]The way the early church got new members was by preaching the Gospel of Jesus the Christ. Living and preacing Christ is the best way to increase a church. In fact it is the NT way. If Paul thought that having babies was the way God wanted it, he would not have told us not to marry if we can, would he have? [/SIGN]​

Notice, please, what jmcrae said. My understanding of the post is that the CC is not growing enough because children are not being born into catholic homes. My response was that the NT way to add church members is ‘evangelizing’ adults who are not Christian.
 
I live in the state where the Duggars are from and I hear this sort of Catholic bashing (for having so many kids) all the time, so I assure you I’m not having any difficulty understanding. No, I understand the veiled insults just fine, thanks.

I have no clue who tha Duggars are.​

I can assure you, the best I know my own heart, I’m not bashing you or your church. I try to say what I mean and mean what I say, no veil intended.
 

I have no clue who tha Duggars are.​

I can assure you, the best I know my own heart, I’m not bashing you or your church. I try to say what I mean and mean what I say, no veil intended.
If you mean no insult, then perhaps you should not have defended Kevin, who clearly intended his comparison of the Catholic Church to the Duggars as an insult.

But to address your concern directly, there is no conflict between adding to the Church via new births and adding to the Church via evangelization. It’s a both/and, not an either/or. If you think the Catholic Church does not evangelize adults, then you are as misguided as Kevin. After all, you are on this forum, which is intended for just such a purpose, and you are talking to one who has been evangelized by the Catholic Church–me.
 
If you mean no insult, then perhaps you should not have defended Kevin, who clearly intended his comparison of the Catholic Church to the Duggars as an insult.

But to address your concern directly, there is no conflict between adding to the Church via new births and adding to the Church via evangelization. It’s a both/and, not an either/or. If you think the Catholic Church does not evangelize adults, then you are as misguided as Kevin. After all, you are on this forum, which is intended for just such a purpose, and you are talking to one who has been evangelized by the Catholic Church–me.

I DID NOT say there was a conflict. I DID say that one is obviously part of the NT and one I don’t find in the NT as a way to build the church Jesus founded. In fact, if one takes Paul seriously, one will not marry or maybe, if married, have fewer children so one could be freer to spread the Gospel.​

I don’t want to put words in Kevin’s keyboard 😃 but I doubt it was meant as an insult. I’ll bet once he explains his reason for using the family he did was to show the silliness of a position by bring out an extreme.​

I’ve read nothing yet from Kevin (not that I’ve read much) that leads me to think he’s anti-catholic.​

If I notice anyone being anti-catholic, I’ll have something to say to the person in a private message, and then maybe publically if need be.
 
Ad hominem attacks on that poster or upon the Church’s position concerning procreation only serve to make you look more painted into a corner on the infant baptism issue than you already are. Just accept the fact that you stand on no venerable scriptural interpretive or traditional ground, and have lost your argument, and move on. We are not offended by your thinly veiled attacks on our culture, which unabashedly celebrates openness to life and children, big families and procreation, motherhood and fatherhood. Using it as an insult just makes you look culturally deprived, and quite frankly, scared of minorities.
Lets see attacks- Post 61 saying your innovative and relatively mew {mostly Baptist} theology is and unfoftunate developement, Yet you continue preach this falsehood. How sad. Post 62 saying I’m speaaking heresy. Post 67 I’m inventing some gnostic intullectual ascent theology. Post 75 again with the false innovations.

You say we aren offended by your thinly veiled attacks on our culture, which unabashedly celebrates openness to life and children, big families and procreation, motherhood and fatherhood. Using insults just makes you look cultually deprived and guite frankly, scared of minorities.
Now lets take a look at this. I said that Catholics don’t believe in birth control or use it so that means that every Catholic household should always have a infant in it. Nowthat seems like I know the culture and not deprived and scared of minorities. So Catholics are minorities now.
jmcrae responce was, Actually, it should and the fact that so many Catholics DON’T FOLLOW THE TEACHINGS OF THE CHURCH is really going to hurt us when we are OUTNUMBERED BY THE UNBELIEVERS. Now lets look at this, he does agree that there should be big families, but he also says that many Catholics don’t follow the teachings of the church. Now this statement seems to be an attack on the church by one of your own. Now by saying that you will be outnumbered by the unbelievers that he/she is affraid to be a minority that you say I’m scared of.

So lookijng at this I would say that you are wrong about me and that the attack on you church has to do with one of you own. Now I know you will disagree with me I expect that.
 
I DID NOT say there was a conflict. I DID say that one is obviously part of the NT and one I don’t find in the NT as a way to build the church Jesus founded.
Really? Paul says to “bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.” Eph. 6:4. And he praises Timothy because he knew scriptures from infancy. 2 Tim. 3:15.
In fact, if one takes Paul seriously, one will not marry or maybe, if married, have fewer children so one could be freer to spread the Gospel.
Does your church require priests to be celibate for that very reason? Mine does.
 
If you mean no insult, then perhaps you should not have defended Kevin, who clearly intended his comparison of the Catholic Church to the Duggars as an insult.

But to address your concern directly, there is no conflict between adding to the Church via new births and adding to the Church via evangelization. It’s a both/and, not an either/or. If you think the Catholic Church does not evangelize adults, then you are as misguided as Kevin. After all, you are on this forum, which is intended for just such a purpose, and you are talking to one who has been evangelized by the Catholic Church–me.
The Duggers are a family that is on a reality tv show who have 20 children. The show is called “18 and counting” and now they are up to 20 children instead of 18. This was not to be a insult to the Catholics but a comparison to the amount of children.
 
The Duggers are a family that is on a reality tv show who have 20 children. The show is called “18 and counting” and now they are up to 20 children instead of 18. They had 2 more children in less then3 years.
I know that. But your use of their family as an extreme case to be compared to was meant as a negative comment against Catholics. You can try to disown that or put a spin on it now, but you meant the comparison as a derogatory one and you know it.
 
Really? Paul says to “bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.” Eph. 6:4. And he praises Timothy because he knew scriptures from infancy. 2 Tim. 3:15.

Does your church require priests to be celibate for that very reason? Mine does.

No church should REQUIRE their leaders to be celibate. Paul wasn’t requiring celebacy. Paul did, however, tell Timothy and Titus to apoint bishops that were the husbands of one wife and whose children were obedient.​

In 1 Timothy 4:3, in context, Paul very harshly warns about those who forbid marriage. I’m not sure what he’s specifically speaking about, but if I were to start a Christian religion, I’d not forbid leaders to marry just because of that one verse.
 
I know that. But your use of their family as an extreme case to be compared to was meant as a negative comment against Catholics. You can try to disown that or put a spin on it now, but you meant the comparison as a derogatory one and you know it.
No I didn’t mean it like that, It was in the responct to the post of jmcrae the says, Actually, it should. In referenct to the, then the Catholics should have a infant in there household all the time. See the comparison to the Duggers. It seems they have a infant in their household all the time. Like I said it was not intended to be a insult but mearly a comparison.
 
I just visited the website of the Duggars. They seem to be lovers of Jesus. Why be offended at the use of the Duggars to make a point or comparrison? Am I missing something?
 
There’s two baptisms, which one is key to understanding these passages. And then Paul would say, ‘one baptism’ so what does that mean? WOW, seems confusing. Thank God we can search the Bible for answers. Thank God He has given us the Holy Spirit to make our search fruitful.
How can one make the claim of having a bible, when the first 400 years of Christians did not have a bible as we have today. Faith comes from hearing (Romans 10:17), not reading.

Scripture is very clear there is only one baptism, (Ephesians 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism) how do you find two confusing baptism’s from the scriptural posts #38 and #39 that I provided? Water baptism in the Holy Spirit is what makes us a new creation in Jesus Christ. Man cannot do this on his own by believing only; (Mark 16:15
He said to them, "Go into the whole world and **proclaim the gospel to every creature.
16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned. **

Who can doubt the power of God who saves even infants from the power of death.

You cannot provide no scripture that excludes children and or infants from baptism
. When scripture includes “Entire households” were baptised. An understanding of first century Jewish culture will confirm that “Entire households” includes infants in arms, slaves and free persons Jewish or not, whom ever lived in the Entire household was baptised.

Once people (sinners) heard the Gospel message, what always followed was baptism, which cleansed the actual sin, including original sin, to become children of the Father in heaven, when baptism is the beginning initiation into the (kingdom of God) body of Jesus Christ.

Acts 8:11-13
They paid attention to him (Simon Magus) because he had astounded them by his magic for a long time, **but once they began to believe **Philip as he preached the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, men and women alike were baptized. Even Simon himself believed and, after being baptized, became devoted to Philip.

Titus 3:5
… not because of any righteous deeds we had done but because of his mercy, he saved us through the bath of rebirth (baptism) and renewal by the holy Spirit.

1 Cor 1:16
I (Paul) baptized the household of Stephanas also …

Acts 11:13-14
He related to us how he had seen (the) angel standing in his house, saying, ‘Send someone to Joppa and summon Simon, who is called **Peter, who will speak words to you by which you and all your household will be saved.’ **

Acts 16:15
**After she **(Lydia of Thyatira) and her household had been baptized, she offered us an invitation…

Acts 16:30
Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31
And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you and your household will be saved."
32
**So they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to everyone in his house. **
33
He took them in at that hour of the night and bathed their wounds; **then he and all his family were baptized at once. **

(To be “baptised at once” is a fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy of baptism by Sprinkling)

Ezekiel 36:25 **I will sprinkle clean water upon you to cleanse you from all your impurities, **and from all your idols I will cleanse you. 26 I will give you a new heart and place a new spirit within you, taking from your bodies your stony hearts and giving you natural hearts. 27 I will put my spirit within you and make you live by my statutes, careful to observe my decrees. 29 I will save you from all your impurities;

(**Justin (Martyr) (Rome, 100-165), First Apology, Ch. 61 see Ezekiel 36:25
They (those to be baptized) then are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water … The reason for this we have received from the Apostles.) **

(Paul relates circumcision with the baptism of Christ)
Col 2:11-12
In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body,** with the circumcision of Christ.** You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

(Philip revealed the scriptures of Isaiah to the eunuch what follows from hearing the Gospel and believing comes the sacrament of baptism.)

Acts 8:36,38
As they traveled along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “Look, there is water. What is to prevent my being baptized?” … Then he ordered the chariot to stop, and **Philip and the eunuch both went down into the water, and he baptized him. **

Acts 10:47
"Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have?"

Eph 5:26
… to sanctify her, **cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, **
**Cyprian (Carthage, 200-258): Letters, No. 69:12
You have asked … whether they are to accounted legitimate Christians,
for that they are not to be washed, but sprinkled, with the saving water. **… I think that the divine benefits can in no respect be mutilated and weakened; nor can anything less occur in that case where, with full and entire faith both of the giver and receiver, is accepted what is drawn from the divine gifts … **it ought not to trouble any one that sick people seem to be sprinkled or effused, when they obtain the Lord’s grace. **
 
Really? Paul says to “bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.” Eph. 6:4. And he praises Timothy because he knew scriptures from infancy. 2 Tim. 3:15. Wonderful verses but what do they have to do with infant baptism?

Does your church require priests to be celibate for that very reason? Mine does. No. The Bible doesn’t forbid it. In fact, what do you think about: 1 Timothy 4:3 (1-3)
 
How can one make the claim of having a bible, when the first 400 years of Christians did not have a bible as we have today. Faith comes from hearing (Romans 10:17), not reading.

Scripture is very clear there is only one baptism, (Ephesians 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism) how do you find two confusing baptism’s from the scriptural posts #38 and #39 that I provided? Water baptism in the Holy Spirit is what makes us a new creation in Jesus Christ. Man cannot do this on his own by believing only;
How many baptisms do you count in the following:

Ac 19:
3 And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
4 Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
 
How many baptisms do you count in the following:

Ac 19:
3 And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
4 Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
IF what you hold to is true, then it may qualify you for the noble peace prize for proving the bible contradicts itself? but it never does. In the biblical Apostolic faith there is only ONE BAPTISM never two, in fact the above scripture proves the baptism of Jesus supersedes the baptism of John’s. These are not two baptisms practiced in the Church of Jesus Christ, there can be only one baptism, one faith, one Lord as the bible clearly states. I ask again, where do you see two baptisms from Pauls teachings I provided.

What you introduced here; I asked earlier on this thread? what is the difference between the baptism of John the baptist, and Jesus baptism? To which no one could answer or did not answer?

This scripture you provided here; proves the importance of being baptised into Jesus Christ. John the baptist stated to his disciples “I must decrease while he (Jesus ) must increase”. John baptism precluded Jesus, by giving Israel a bath to cleanse them in order to receive the coming Messiah Jesus. This baptism was an outer washing, which cleansed them in the Old covenant which was an outer physical covenant close to disappearing. The baptism of Jesus Christ is the one baptism that brings one into the death, resurrection of eternal life in Jesus, which is an eternal “Soul” internal cleansing that removes original sin of the broken creation covenant, and actual sin and punishment from the covenant law, which Jesus fulfills in his body and blood sacrifice.

This Baptism of Jesus, is necessary for salvation which saves now. You apparently got Johns baptism confused with Jesus baptism. Johns baptism ended with his death. So When Jesus begins his ministry after his 40 day journey into the desert, there remains thereafter only “one baptism” in Jesus Christ.

John’s baptism bathed those to recieve the prophetic messiah fulfilled in Jesus Christ, just as Jesus received those baptised disciples of John the Baptist, and made them one in himself. Now these disciples of John the baptist cleaned to recieve their messiah, will recieve the true baptism that puts to death the law which convicts us and resurrects these into eternal life in Jresus Christ, making us a new creation in Christ as children of the living God, to which baptism gives us the right to pray “ABBA FATHER”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top