Baptism...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Singinbeauty
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Again Congratulations, Singin, welcome to our family.

If you other guys would like to start a thread on all your different interpretations, I invite you to start a thread.

I just took a class on Baptism at our diocese, I am glad you are studying and keeping firm in your commitment to Christ.

You are one of the most “Catholic” evangelicals I have seen on the net. 🙂

Don’t let people discourage you in your journey to come closer to Christ.

God Bless
Scylla
 
OOPS! I just realized that it’s SinginBeauty (no ‘g’). Sorry I’ve been messing up your screen name! :o

God Bless,
RyanL
 
That’s ok! 🙂 I had one person who spelled my screen name ‘Sininbeauty’… I didn’t quite agree with Sin-in-beauty since that is a contradiction in terms… hehe 😃
 
40.png
Singinbeauty:
Please keep me in your thoughts. I lost my job on Friday and really don’t know what I am going to do.
When God closes a door, He always opens a window. Trust in the Lord and He will guide you to your new vocation. I will pray for you.

Happy baptism!
Mickey
 
40.png
Singinbeauty:
Well everyone… I am going to be baptized in a couple of weeks. For those of you who don’t know me, no it will not be in the catholic church, but I am going to be making my public statement to the world of WHO I follow. Praise God! I am so excited!!! 😃
That is FABULOUS … and if you are being baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit then you are receiving a Catholic Baptism…😉
 
Well everyone… God is awesome and faithful… I got a job today! I am so excited about my new opportunity and things could not have gone smoother. God is in control and I am so glad! Say a praise with me!!! 😃
 
CONGRATULATIONS my sister in Christ! and I know that, as your journey continues, some day you will join us by receiving the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity of your Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. I pray for that day and I sing praises for the gifts you have allready received!
 
Hi Sin-in-Beauty (Not!) 😛
40.png
Singinbeauty:
This is true BUT I do have about 3 or 4 people coming to see me doing this that don’t go to church and I am hoping that this, while affirming my faith in God and changing me inwardly, will be a testiment to those who are attending to turn to God or at least plant a seed and that could be making Satan nervous. 🙂
Actually, I think Fidelis was confirming you in your acknowledgement that Satan is at work seeking to upset your plans for a baptism and suggesting that this is “proof” for those who don’t believe that baptism is something of significance. And, as you have pointed out, the sacraments are also a way that we can witness to others our love for Christ.

Also, I am 1) Sorry you lost your job on Friday, 2) Glad you have faith that God is in the drivers seat, and 3) Thrilled to hear that He took the fast route to bringing you to another opportunity. Congratulations. Now you need to keep us informed as to how it’s going. What was your other job and what position did you find today to replace it?

I hope you find that this job is a vast improvement over what you were doing before.

God Bless you and let us know how things with your baptism go.

CARose
 
40.png
RyanL:
TK,

My brother in Christ, please don’t make me ask again. I am all for correction in its proper season; see my other 1000+ posts. If you would like to discuss Baptism as a Sacrament, start a new thread and link to it. This thread is for SingingBeauty. Let’s keep focus.

God Bless,
RyanL
Oops! It’s 2 Tim 4.2 “preach the word, be urgent In season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching”. Not 1 Tim 4.2 . My bad.
My brother in Christ (thanks to our baptisms). You’ll notice that the verse doesn’t say anything about correction “in it’s proper season”. It specifically promotes correction in season and out of season.
Baptism is a sacrament no matter where you talk about it.
It was in this thread that Bro. Rich was rebuked for adhering to 2Tim 4.2, and the Catholic faith was attacked by OpenTheist and Blackstone. It is our duty to defend that faiith “in season and out of season”. That’s what these boards and the Catholic Answers organization are all about, not withstanding your 1000+ posts. The “focus” is on Christ and His Church.
Code:
                                             God Bless,
                                                   thread
 
40.png
Singinbeauty:
I am glad that everyone else here doesn’t voice their disappointment. By throwing verses at me and basically telling me that I am going about it all wrong is not the way to get me to convert as most have found on this board when it comes to me. I am sorry you are disappointed but I was not looking for someone to tell me my beliefs are wrong just looking to share with others my excitement in my upcoming baptism… So thanx for your (name removed by moderator)ut but I really was not asking for it. 🙂
Dear Singinbeauty -

It is a happy day when people find that thier spiritual journey leads them to Jesus. Jesus’ words, “Baptise in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” bring us the Spirit of Truth that will cleanse us and help us on our way to Him. The day of your Baptism is the day that you become a part of the Body of Christ, no matter which denomination. Congratulations!

Subrosa
 
40.png
Singinbeauty:
Well everyone… I am going to be baptized in a couple of weeks. For those of you who don’t know me, no it will not be in the catholic church, but I am going to be making my public statement to the world of WHO I follow. Praise God! I am so excited!!! 😃
Well, Congratulations!! Feels great, dont it?
 
threadkiller claimed
Paul rejects baptism? I don’t think so. It’s more like you reject scripture. 1 Cor 1.17 is hyperbole.
You are telling me that Paul’s statement that “Christ did NOT send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel” is hyperbole?? What in the world!?!? If you know what hyperbole is, then there is no way you could refer to that statement of Paul’s as hyperbole.

Here is a definition of this figure of speech used in the Bible

A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.

Paul’s statement that he “was NOT sent to baptize [as in water baptism from the immediate context], but to preach the gospel” shows that water baptism is at the very least NOT a part of the Gospel of the Uncircumcision that was committed to Paul (Gal 2:7). Water baptism for the remission of sins, though, clearly IS part of the Gospel of the Circumcision committed to Peter (Acts 2:38; Gal 2:8).

you said
He just finished listing the people he did baptize
Yes he did. He did not do it for salvation or the remission of sins as Peter did we find out from what he wrote in his epistles concerning salvation. Paul realizes that water baptism is not a part of the gospel. In fact, he thanks God that he baptized no one else. If Paul’s message included water baptism for the remission of sins then there is no way that he could “thank God” for not having a part in helping people remit their sins.
and he was correcting the Corinthians because they thought they were being baptized into the minsters who baptized them rather than into Christ.
Yes, he did indeed correct them. If water baptism were part of the gospel that Paul preached, which you claim is the case in contradiction to what Paul says about not being sent to baptize, then he could have easily wrote about how their thinking was flawed without saying “I was NOT sent to baptize, but to preach the gospel.”
You thumb your nose at scripture when you wrench verses out of context to affirm your own distorted beliefs.
I don’t “wrench” any verses out of context. If you believe that I do, then demonstrate that I do so. If you can’t show it don’t assert it. Read those passages in Numbers and Ezekiel. They are commands given by God to Israel to baptize with water. Water baptism is a work of the law. At the very least, you must say that water baptism is a work of some sort that you believe is essential to obtaining salvation in the “Catholic Church”. Do you deny that water baptism is a work??
 
threadkiller referenced a few passages, as if those passages somehow nullified the fact that water baptism is a work of the law (or at least a work) and do away with the fact that Paul was not sent to baptize with water, saying
Read John 10.34-36 and know that scripture cannot be broken, then read Matthew 28.19-20 and obey.
I have and here are my conclusions.

Here is what John 10:34-36 says

John 10:34-36 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, “You are gods” '? 35 "If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

The Greek word for broken is luo. Here is the definition given in Strong’s Concordance
3089 luo {loo’-o}
a root word; TDNT - 2:60 & 4:328,543; v
AV - loose 27, break 5, unloose 3, destroy 2, dissolve 2, put off 1,
melt 1, break up 1, break down 1; 43
  1. to loose any person (or thing) tied or fastened
    1a) bandages of the feet, the shoes,
    1b) of a husband and wife joined together by the bond of matrimony
    1c) of a single man, whether he has already had a wife or has not
    yet married
  2. to loose one bound, i.e. to unbind, release from bonds, set free
    2a) of one bound up (swathed in bandages)
    2b) bound with chains (a prisoner), discharge from prison, let go
  3. to loosen, undo, dissolve, anything bound, tied, or compacted together
    3a) an assembly, i.e. to dismiss, break up
    3b) laws, as having a binding force, are likened to bonds
    3c) to annul, subvert
    3d) to do away with, to deprive of authority, whether by precept
    or act
    3e) to declare unlawful
    3f) to loose what is compacted or built together, to break up,
    demolish, destroy
    3g) to dissolve something coherent into parts, to destroy
    3h) metaph., to overthrow, to do away with
Which specific meaning to apply here is not absolutely clear. We can be sure its not 1c since the context has nothing to do with being divorced or “loosed” from a husband or wife as Paul uses the word (1 Cor 7:27). Of the available options in that definition, I gotta go with 3d.

We know from following the history of God relating to His creation from Genesis 1:1 on that Jesus’ statement “the Scripture cannot be broken” cannot mean that God cannot change or do away with a requirement or law if he so pleases. For example, God changes the dietary law several times in the Bible - from eating only plant life from creation to the flood, to allowing the consumption of everything for Noah and his family on, to allowing everything except specific animals for Israel, then again to allowing the consumption of whatever you like for those in the Body.

Likewise, if God wants to change the requirement of a work like water baptism, then He has the right to do that.

Now, let’s look at Matt 28:19-20. It says

Matthew 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, [even] to the end of the age.” Amen.

I do not follow this command because


  1. *]Water baptism is no longer a part of the gospel and not necessary for the remission of sins (Rom 3:21; 4:5; Eph 2:8-9; Tit 3:5).

    *]The all things that I have commanded you consists partly of obedience to the Mosaic Law . The Body of Christ is not required to obey the Mosaic law in order to be accepted by God (Acts 10).

    I follow what I like to refer to as The Greater Commission found in 2 Cor 5:16-21

    2 Corinthians 5:16-21 16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know [Him thus] no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone [is] in Christ, [he is] a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. 18 Now all things [are] of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore [you] on Christ’s behalf, BE RECONCILED TO GOD. 21 For He made Him who knew no sin [to be] sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
 
40.png
TheOpenTheist:
Likewise, if God wants to change the requirement of a work like water baptism, then He has the right to do that.

Now, let’s look at Matt 28:19-20. It says

Matthew 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them…

  1. *]Water baptism is no longer a part of the gospel and not necessary for the remission of sins (Rom 3:21; 4:5; Eph 2:8-9; Tit 3:5).
    *]The all things that I have commanded you consists partly of obedience to the Mosaic Law . The Body of Christ is not required to obey the Mosaic law in order to be accepted by God (Acts 10).

    I follow what I like to refer to as The Greater Commission found in 2 Cor 5:16-21

    2 Corinthians 5:16-21 16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh…

  1. Just because God can do something doesn’t mean he did. I have never understood those who say they follow Paul’s
    gospel as opposed to Christ’s.

    It is like you are saying, “I am of Paul” as opposed to “I am of Peter”, etc. Far better fo be of Christ than of either. Therefore His words should always have pre-eminence in our hearts and in our understanding of the Bible.

    Interpret what God is saying through Paul’s writings in light of what God said directly when he walked on earth.
 
40.png
TheOpenTheist:
Paul realizes that water baptism is not a part of the gospel. In fact, he thanks God that he baptized no one else. If Paul’s message included water baptism for the remission of sins then there is no way that he could “thank God” for not having a part in helping people remit their sins.

Do you deny that water baptism is a work??
If one reads the context, Paul is addressing the problem of factions. His reason that he is glad is because he did not add to the problem of factions by performing a large number of baptisms.

I will deny baptism is a work in the sense used in Romans (and any other sense I can think of now). Catholics do baptize infants, so obviously we do not believ it to be a work.
 
40.png
Singinbeauty:
Well everyone… God is awesome and faithful… I got a job today! I am so excited about my new opportunity and things could not have gone smoother. God is in control and I am so glad! Say a praise with me!!! 😃
The responsorial Psalm this weekend was:

“Give God the Glory and Honor”

:amen:
 
pnewton said
Just because God can do something doesn’t mean he did.
I never claimed such a thing about God. Not sure why you said that.

you said
I have never understood those who say they follow Paul’s
gospel as opposed to Christ’s.
The reason why is because


  1. *]God’s inspired Word informs us that Christ committed to Peter the Gospel of the Circumcision and committed to Paul the Gospel of the Uncircumcision (Gal 2:7-8).

    *]The fact that God revealed to paul the mystery concerning the Body of Christ (Rom 16:25; 1 Cor 2:6-7; Eph 1:9; 3:4-9; Col 1:26-27) which Christ never mentioned during His earthly ministry.

    *]The fact that God gave the “house rules of the grace of God” to Paul for those of us who are members or are to become members of Christ’s Body (Eph 3:2).

    you claimed
    It is like you are saying, “I am of Paul” as opposed to “I am of Peter”, etc. Far better fo be of Christ than of either.
    It seems that you’re not even trying to understand my position newtie. Peter and Paul were both given gospels by Christ who is God. Both messages get their content as a result of God creating them, not Peter or Paul or any other man. No one claims to be “of Paul” or of any other man. Those of us who obey and teach the gospel committed to Paul are simply acting in accordance with the most recent public revelation that God has revealed - the revelation concerning the Body of Christ. We’re believing and behaving in accordance with “the house rules of the grace of God” that were given to Paul for us.

    you claimed
    Therefore His words should always have pre-eminence in our hearts and in our understanding of the Bible.
    Jesus Christ is the same God who spoke to Noah and Abraham and Moses in the Old Testament and to Paul in the New Testament. What God has said in each book of the Bible is just as much the true Word of God as anything that was said in the Gospels by God incarnate. In fact, Jesus taught the Law (which you’ll find in Exodus - Deuteronomy) during His earthly ministry! And just as true is the truth that God revealed to Paul, the specific doctrines (house rules) that we are to obey today. We are not to obey all of what is found in the Old Testament or the Gospels because significant truth concerning the Body of Christ had not yet been revealed for those in the Body to follow until God revealed that new revelation to Paul. And some of what God revealed to Paul is contrary to what we find in the Old Testament and the Gospels and early Acts.

    There are differences in some of the things that God expects of those who trust Him throughout history (what to eat, whether to circumcise or not, which rites to perform, how to handle your finances, etc). If there is a conflict in what is read in the Gospels compared to what is read in Paul’s epistles, then we are to go with what we find in Paul’s epistles since it is the gospel committed to him that we are to believe and is the MOST RECENT public revelation that we have from God.

    you said
    Interpret what God is saying through Paul’s writings in light of what God said directly when he walked on earth.
    What basis do you have to give precedence to God’s Word during Jesus’ earthly ministry over any other period in which God revealed His will to the saints? Why, in your mind, does Jesus’ teaching during His earthly ministry have more authority then His teaching during His heavenly ministry after He ascended into heaven? Why not use a much more well established principle of interpretation that says go with the most recent revelation from God over the older revelation?

    And you cannot interpret what Christ gave to Paul in light of what is found in the Gospels in a lot of cases. A logical contradiction is a logical contradiction. There are plenty of commands that Jesus gave during His earthly ministry that we are not to attempt to obey today. Trying to make both the Gospels and Paul’s Epistles agree is a futile goal and will inevitably lead to mixing requirements to obey the law (as Peter and Jesus preached in the Gospels and Acts) with the gospel of grace apart from works that Christ gave to Paul during Christ’s heavenly ministry. Doing so results in confusion and legalism which is what we find in many churches today.
 
pnewton said
If one reads the context, Paul is addressing the problem of factions. His reason that he is glad is because he did not add to the problem of factions by performing a large number of baptisms.
That point is obvious. What you ignored in my response is the fact that Paul proclaimed to the Corinthians that he “was not sent to baptize but to preach the gospel.” This shows that Paul’s gospel does not include water baptism. Paul was not required to make such a statement in order to address the presence of factions within the Corinthian church. Had he left that statement out he could have made the same point.

you said
I will deny baptism is a work in the sense used in Romans (and any other sense I can think of now). Catholics do baptize infants, so obviously we do not believe it to be a work.
So, taking water and pouring it over someone, or dipping them in it 3 times is not a work!? R U serious!?!?!?!? Check your catechism newtie. I am sure that it says in there that baptism is a work. And you will also find that the grace that is allegedly received through the work of baptism is as a result of the work done. IN other words, if you don’t perform water baptism then you don’t receive the grace that comes from doing that work.

And infants are incapable of doing any works because they lack the intelligence to do so at that age. So no, they are not performing a work themselves, but their parents and the priest definitely are performing the work on their behalf. The result of infant baptism is a wet baby, and nothing more than that.
 
Open Theist,

Heads up, you’re on a Catholic forum. We do truly believe that the act of Baptism, as given to us by Christ, for the remission of sins, is necessary for our salvation. Through it we are assured to receive the free gifts of Grace from God, who loves us enough to provide to us these definitive forms of receiving His Grace, which are always freely given gifts.

While through the sacraments we are assured of being given these graces from God, we understand and acknowledge that God is not constrained to the sacraments and these same graces can be given by God outside the sacraments. However, if one would like an assurance of God’s grace, why not follow the form given to us by Christ himself?

It’s like the difference between standing at an ATM and a slot machine. Both can give you the $20 you need to go to the movies, but one is a given, the other a gamble.

Even so, once we receive the $20 (or the grace from God), we can either use it wisely or we can fritter it away. It is in this way that one can lose their salvation, by turning their back on God, through sin. No-one, nothing can seperate us from God, for He is all-powerful and all loving. If Satan himself has designs on us, all his power amounts to nothing if we merely turn to God for assistance in our struggle.

However, if we turn away from God, and leave Him of our own accord through the acts of sin, we can condemn ourselves to an eternity of seperation if we die without repenting our sins.

The wonderful thing about baptism is that it washes away all sin which has occurred before our one baptism in Christ. Not only are the sins forgiven, but we are also cleansed from need to be purged from those sins after we pass. This is why many of the earliest Christians would errantly postpone their baptism until they were quite old, hoping to sneak that baptism in right before being called home to Christ. The problem is, not all of us are given the blessing of a long, slow death, during which the necessary arrangements can be made.

And the graces given during baptism assist us in living a life in closer accord with Christ. Wouldn’t it be a better world if we used these gifts more fully.

God Bless,

CARose
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top