Baptismal Regeneration-churches who don't believe that

  • Thread starter Thread starter specklebean9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
po18guy said:
Are you separating what God has joined? Acts 2:38
Click to expand...
Mark separates them in Mark 16:16–“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned”. Notice that he leaves out baptism when he speaks of those who will be condemned. Then there’s Peter and the conversion of Cornelius and his family–Acts 10:44-48 (NIV) 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days. Notice that they received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. It furthers my belief that regeneration comes first through faith and the requirement to follow Christ’s command follows.
 
Lek said:
Mark separates them in Mark 16:16–“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned”. Notice that he leaves out baptism when he speaks of those who will be condemned. Then there’s Peter and the conversion of Cornelius and his family–Acts 10:44-48 (NIV) 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days. Notice that they received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. It furthers my belief that regeneration comes first through faith and the requirement to follow Christ’s command follows.
Click to expand...
Clearly, as a non-Catholic/non-Orthodox, you must support such teachings. However, what you say does not comport with a reasonable, non-agenda-driven interpretation of scripture. Neither does it comport with the practice of the Church. Actually, in the case of Cornelius, what occurred inseparably from the reception of the Holy Spirit? Baptism!

NOTE: This is the first sign that God’s covenant was with the Gentiles and was a sign to Peter, who hesitated to go to them. AND a sign which occurred immediately after his vision on the rooftop. The order in which God arranges them does in no way separate them from one another.

As to Mark. you are allowing a negative to drive your belief. JEsus mentioned belief and baptism. He did not separate them, but warned that those who do not believe are condemned. Where did He say not to baptize?

He didn’t. What did He and His disciples do? They baptized.

Nothing that you propose here was believed or accepted by the Church before the 16th century rebellion in Germany. I have a problem with that and I believe that you should, too.
 
Lek said:
This passage refers to the cleansing by the Holy Spirit. There’s no mention of baptism.
Click to expand...
But that is what baptism is, washing. Washing is simply another term for baptism. The people of that time would have understand that clearly.

Baptism is a dunking in water, and you dunk things in water in order to wash them, to purify them. Converts to Judaism would be purified first by a form of baptism, a washing. The Jews of that time were used to the idea of purifying by means of water, so the idea of being purified, or having their sins washed away by baptism would be perfectly natural. But we, today, are too worldly to accept such things. We know better.
 
Lek said:
Mark separates them in Mark 16:16–“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned”. Notice that he leaves out baptism when he speaks of those who will be condemned. Then there’s Peter and the conversion of Cornelius and his family–Acts 10:44-48 (NIV) 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days. Notice that they received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. It furthers my belief that regeneration comes first through faith and the requirement to follow Christ’s command follows.
Click to expand...
Obviously, in Mark 16:16, Mark did not have to mention baptism again because it is simply assumed that he who does not believe will also not be baptized. I mean, really.

They received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized, but does that mean they were regenerated?
 
po18guy said:
Catholics and Orthodox Christians (currently 1.5 billion), for 2,000 years have known that God’s grace flows through the Sacraments. Baptism is one of those Sacraments, and is a Sacrament of regeneration, as is the Sacrament of Penance. From John’s baptism of repentance, we see that the two are linked. For those who do not believe in our sinful nature, baptism may appear to do nothing.

Please offer some enlightenment as to why baptism is an ordinance, yet Paul wrote that Christ freed us from ordinances. :confused:
Click to expand...
Lutherans would agree with this, as well.

Jon
 
Lek said:
This passage refers to the cleansing by the Holy Spirit. There’s no mention of baptism.
Click to expand...
This is what you have been taught, but the Apostles passed on to the Church that this is a reference to water baptism, and this is how the early church understood it, up until a couple hundred years ago, when bible Christians began to separate the HS from the water. How do you account for God letting His Church believe wrongly for 1800 years?
Lek said:
Code: 
Mark separates them in Mark 16:16--"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned".  Notice that he leaves out baptism when he speaks of those who will be condemned.
Click to expand...
God can save whoever He wants, with or without water. He has chosen to use water.

We are all condemned as a result of original sin. That is why the one who does not believe is dead already.
Lek said:
Then there’s Peter and the conversion of Cornelius and his family–Acts 10:44-48 (NIV) 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days. Notice that they received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized.
Click to expand...
This is a poor argument, since it was Peter who taught at Pentecost that they should be baptized (to be saved) and be filled with the HS.

God used this situation with Cornelius to convince Peter that the Gentiles were also to receive the HS, and it was clear to Peter that this should not be separated from the wanter, because he immediately ordered them to be baptized. For the Apostles, the HS was infused through the waters of baptism.
Lek said:
Code: 
It furthers my belief that regeneration comes first through faith and the requirement to follow Christ's command follows.
Click to expand...
We also believe this with regard to adults, but since baptism replaces circumcision, we also baptize children based upon the faith of their parents.
 
Lek said:
Isn’t that what regeneration is? It’s when we receive the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
Yes. The Apostles taught that this occurred at baptism, though God can cause it to occur anytime and anywhere he wants. From the Word Studies of the NT:

By the washing of regeneration (διὰ λουτροῦ παλινγενεσίας). Λουτρόν only here and Eph. 5:26. It does not mean the act of bathing, but the bath, the laver. Παλινγενεσία only here and Matt. 19:28, where it is used of the final restoration of all things. The phrase laver of regeneration distinctly refers to baptism, in connection with which and through which as a medium regeneration is conceived as taking place. Comp. Rom. 6:3–5. It is true that nothing is said of faith; but baptism implies faith on the part of its recipient. It has no regenerating effect apart from faith; and the renewing of the Holy Spirit is not bestowed if faith be wanting.

Vincent, M. R. (1887). Word studies in the New Testament (Vol. 4, p. 349). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
 
Lek said:
mackbrislawn;12282006:
Isn’t that what regeneration is? It’s when we receive the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
Were those who received the Holy Spirit regenerated? Does scripture say that? They apparently had faith, so then baptism was in order. Compare this to those in Jerusalem that Peter was preaching to, those who were cut to the heart, that is, those who believed Peter, accepted his message and had faith. What should they do now? His answer to them was “repent and be baptized.”

Scripture says, “He who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved.” To call upon the name of the Lord first requires faith in the Lord (those without faith wouldn’t be expected to call upon His name); but they aren’t saved until they call upon His name. This implies that one’s faith itself is not salvific, but it is the response to one’s faith. According to Peter, the proper response is baptism. No wonder Peter says “baptism saves you now.” Baptism is the Christian way of calling upon the name of the Lord. Peter tells us baptism is an appeal for a clear conscience, and we can know that appeal is valid through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Compare it also to the story of General Naaman in 2nd Kings. He had faith to go to the prophet Elisha to have his leprosy cured, but it wasn’t until he actually washed in the Jordan did his skin become like that of a babe. He had to physically do what Elisha’s servant told him to do, even though Naaman expected Elisha merely to come out and wave his arms to effect the cure. So, in the same way, we have to actually do what Jesus tells us to do, be baptized.

However, it is true, faith itself is considered a gift of the Holy Spirit. Is receiving that gift the same as receiving the Holy Spirit?

And, it is also true, if you get run over by a chariot or thrown to the lions on the way to being baptized, most likely the Holy Spirit will count your faith as enough. (What we call baptism of desire and baptism of blood.)

But, in general, I think that the pattern Peter established in Jerusalem is the foundational paradigm for all subsequent interpretations. (We mustn’t read the bible backwards!)
Click to expand...
 
Lek said:
I believe the catholic church sees baptism as an act that must be performed on an individual in order for that person to be saved, in addition to faith. I see it as something a believer must do, because Jesus commanded it. So I do believe it is necessary in that way, because one who refuses to be baptized is not following Christ. I don’t believe that the act of baptism in itself is regenerating. I personally lean toward baptism as being the christian equivalent of circumcision. “In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism” Col 2:8-15. Circumcision was also not regenerative, but was of high importance and required of the Jews by God.
Click to expand...
Here are some of the things the Catechism tells us.

“CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
SECOND EDITION
1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.”

"CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
SECOND EDITION
537 Through Baptism the Christian is sacramentally assimilated to Jesus, who in his own baptism anticipates his death and resurrection. The Christian must enter into this mystery of humble self-abasement and repentance, go down into the water with Jesus in order to rise with him, be reborn of water and the Spirit so as to become the Father’s beloved son in the Son and “walk in newness of life”:

Let us be buried with Christ by Baptism to rise with him; let us go down with him to be raised with him; and let us rise with him to be glorified with him.
Everything that happened to Christ lets us know that, after the bath of water, the Holy Spirit swoops down upon us from high heaven and that, adopted by the Father’s voice, we become sons of God."

Again, this is just part of what the Church has to say about this wonderful, and God given Sacrament.

May God Bless you 🙂
 
It is amazing how far away from Jesus’s teachings man has gone in order to avoid “all things Catholic”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top