Baptists, Evangelicals and the Baptismal Sacrament

  • Thread starter Thread starter stewstew03
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
kirkdickinson said:
I would say YES. They have to be baptized after Repentance. Repentance is personal and can’t be done through proxy.
Click to expand...
If a person is baptized, then repents later, and never gets around to being “re-baptized”, will that person be considered “saved”?
 
And yes, I do partake of the bread and cup, and like the disciples recognize that is only a symbol, and therefore that the bread and cup are a representation of his body and blood, not the real thing. The thing is if everyone in your church has a wafer, and you believe that your wafer IS Christ, then you have a bunch of Jesus’ present which is polytheism, and I may not know a lot about Catholicism (as you can tell, haha), but I know that Roman Catholicism is not a polytheistic religion.

Furthermore, the Bible teaches the following -
Jesus said, “God is a Spirit, and they that worship Him must worship in him in spirit [which is invisible] and truth” (John 4:24). After Jesus ascended into heaven, Paul said true worshippers are those “which worship God in the spirit” (Phil. 3:3). The eternal, immortal King is invisible to those on earth until He returns (1 Tim. 1:17). Christians are called to look on “the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2 Cor. 4:18).
Jesus also warned us not to believe anyone who says, “Here is the Christ” (Mat. 24:23). Jesus Christ, the Eternal God, is now physically present at the right hand of the Father (Luke 22:69). He will not return to the earth until after the tribulation (Mat. 24:29-30). To worship any image in the place of God provokes Him to anger. God has this to say to idolaters: “they have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities” (Deut. 32:21). The Roman Catholic Church has "exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image "

To teach that the incorruptible, almighty and holy God is contained in a corruptible wafer that can be handled, eaten, digested and expelled is indeed the most irreverent, desecrating and profane form of idolatry. When Isaiah was confronted with God’s holiness he cried out, “Woe is me, for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips…” (Isaiah 6:5). When asked what happens to Jesus after the Eucharist is consumed, priests try to explain the unexplainable by suggesting the body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus departs from the Eucharist as it is being digested. (excerpt from an article I read about the different ways religions remember the last supper).

That last bit is from an article, but does your priest or I guess, what does Catholicism say about what happens to Christ once you eat him? And you still have yet to answer me, because my curiosity is piqued, when you partake of the cup, do you taste blood??
 
aidanbradypop said:
So I am a Christian and a Catholic, but the cradle Catholic who was baptized as an infant is left out? :confused:
Click to expand...
No. You are approaching how we view baptism with the presuppositions of how Catholicism views baptism. A cradle Catholic who is a truly regenerate Christian is a Christian even if he or she is never baptized as a believer. What determines a Christian is the work of the Spirit. If that person were to later decide to join a Baptist church they would be baptized, though.
 
Gaelic Bard—sorry, joining in on your thread to comment. “No. You are approaching how we view baptism with the presuppositions of how Catholicism views baptism. A cradle Catholic who is a truly regenerate Christian is a Christian even if he or she is never baptized as a believer. What determines a Christian is the work of the Spirit. If that person were to later decide to join a Baptist church they would be baptized, though.”

I was sprinkled as a Catholic when I was a baby, then my Dad (for whatever reason) got my grandma to “baptize” my 3 other siblings (all younger) and I in a stream when I was about 12. I got saved when I was 16, because I came to my own understanding after hearing the gospel preached to me over the course of a few years at bible camp. I was saved by the Jesus Christ of John 14:6. Furthermore I knew that if I (Romans 10:9) “shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”

And so in retrospect I was never scripturally baptized because as a baby, I hadn’t made my own profession of faith, and neither was I baptized scripturally at 12, because I still hadn’t made my own profession of faith, neither did my grandma have any authority to do so. I was only scripturally baptized AFTER my salvation. And by the way, not one of my other siblings believes in God, so if they were supposedly “baptized” but don’t believe in God…does Roman Catholicism teach that they are saved (just curious?). The fundamental church I attend pointed out (with good humour) that the first two times weren’t even baptism, and that I still needed to get baptized, and so I did. No problem, because it was scripturally consistent teaching.
 
kirkdickinson said:
I would say YES. They have to be baptized after Repentance. Repentance is personal and can’t be done through proxy.
Click to expand...
Sorry Kirk,

It is the continuous Tradition of the Catholic Church from the Apostles (Acts 16:15-33; 1 Corinthians 1:16; Colossians 2:11-12) onwards that our Lord intended the sacrament of Baptism to be conferred on infants equally with adults. There are many Protestants who also believe this.

As to their lack of actual faith it is paralleled by their lack of actual sin.

Our differences, I think, come from the fact that as Catholics we believe that Baptism actualy regenerates the soul. Whereas, from the Baptist perspective you believe that it doesn’t.

Am I correct?
 
ltwin said:
Maybe you should read more carefully.
Click to expand...
Wow, ltwin. You and I have not been in a conversation together in a long time prior to this. You certainly have changed your tone here these past few weeks.

The old ltwin that I was in dialogue with would never have made such a remark.
As you can see, I used the word “at least.” I think anyone can agree that the minimum characteristic of a Christian baptism is that it involve water and that it be done in the name of the God that Christians worship
Click to expand...
I don’t think so, ltwin. Without any central authority Christians are free to read the Bible and claim that their way of baptizing, perhaps without involving water and the “name of the God that Christians worship” is as valid as yours. 🤷

Here’s a story of someone who baptized in lemon cola.
johnbarrysblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/norway-baby-baptized-in-cola-as.html

And check this out:
One man in Hollywood, California, insisted on being immersed in a huge tank full of rose petals. And if you think that’s bizarre, consider the two latest incidents involving men of the cloth. One preacher gathered his new converts in a Baltimore Street and turned the fire hose on them, declaring them now baptized. Another minister met a lady in the grocery store who wanted to be baptized, and he sprinkled her right there on the spot—with a bottle of Coca-Cola. amazingfacts.org/media-library/book/e/14/t/baptism–is-it-really-necessary.aspx

As I said, there’s lots of bizarre groups out there that read the Bible, and divorced from the One Faith which gave them the Bible, come to their own interpretations.

And, as they are following the exact model that you claim to follow (you read and prayerfully examine the Word), you cannot tell them that their view is wrong.

Catholics, thankfully, can.
 
cuddlz24 said:
So, yes, I did not mean that Jesus went to heaven the same day as his crucifixion.
Click to expand...
So the Good Thief, who may or may not have been baptized, could not have gone to heaven immediately after he died with Jesus, right?
 
kirkdickinson said:
I would say YES. They have to be baptized after Repentance. Repentance is personal and can’t be done through proxy.
Click to expand...
Where do you get that one’s parents can’t stand in for you baptism? What Bible verse says that?
 
cuddlz24 said:
And yes, I do partake of the bread and cup, and like the disciples recognize that is only a symbol,
Click to expand...
Why would the disciples claim that this is a “hard saying” and leave him for that?

Does anyone really think it’s a “hard saying” to say that bread and wine are symbolic?
and therefore that the bread and cup are a representation of his body and blood, not the real thing. The thing is if everyone in your church has a wafer, and you believe that your wafer IS Christ, then you have a bunch of Jesus’ present which is polytheism, and I may not know a lot about Catholicism (as you can tell, haha), but I know that Roman Catholicism is not a polytheistic religion
Click to expand...
That’s a bizarre definition of polytheism, cuddlz.

Having Jesus present in all the tabernacles of the world, and in every Catholic communicant is no more polytheism, then it is for you to say that Jesus is present where 2 or 3 are gathered…in Bethesda, in Kankakee and in Topeka.

Or are you of the opinion that Jesus is not present in your church as well as in a church in Beijing at the same time?

:hmmm:
 
cuddlz24 said:
To teach that the incorruptible, almighty and holy God is contained in a corruptible wafer that can be handled, eaten, digested and expelled is indeed the most irreverent, desecrating and profane form of idolatry.
Click to expand...
Heh. You do know, cuddlz, that you’ve just set yourself up for arguing for the Immaculate Conception and sinlessness of the Virgin Mary, right? 😃

The argument you propose above is the very same argument that we use to say that Mary could not have had any sin in her: because she contained the incorruptible, almighty and Holy God in her blessed womb.

Incidentally, all Catholics are free from sin, pure and holy vessels, when we receive Him in the Eucharist.

So there’s no desecration there at all.
 
kirkdickinson said:
What Bible verse says you could?
Click to expand...
Kirk,

Before the bible was canonized by the Catholic Church, we could look at what the Church believed, those beliefs were handed down by the Apostles who were taught by Christ. Baptism is the new convenant sign, replacing circumcision which was done at eight days old. The argument in the early church was on what day a new born should be baptized, not what year. And, no one argued whether the words “whole household” included newborns.

I still like the whole household thread.

"The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sins, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit." Origen, Commentary on Romans, 5:9 (A.D. 244).

“For He came to save all through means of Himself–all, I say, who through Him are born again to God–infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2,22:4 (A.D. 180).

**“And they shall baptise the little children first. And if they can answer for themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let their parents answer or someone from their family.” **Hippolytus of Rome, Apostolic Tradition, 21 (c. A.D. 215).

The Church believed in infant baptism as they were now circumcised in Christ and circumcision took place at day eight of life.

Pork
 
Porknpie said:
Kirk,

Before the bible was canonized by the Catholic Church, we could look at what the Church believed, those beliefs were handed down by the Apostles who were taught by Christ. Baptism is the new convenant sign, replacing circumcision which was done at eight days old. The argument in the early church was on what day a new born should be baptized, not what year. And, no one argued whether the words “whole household” included newborns.

I still like the whole household thread.

"The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sins, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit." Origen, Commentary on Romans, 5:9 (A.D. 244).

“For He came to save all through means of Himself–all, I say, who through Him are born again to God–infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2,22:4 (A.D. 180).

**“And they shall baptise the little children first. And if they can answer for themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let their parents answer or someone from their family.” **Hippolytus of Rome, Apostolic Tradition, 21 (c. A.D. 215).

The Church believed in infant baptism as they were now circumcised in Christ and circumcision took place at day eight of life.

Pork
Click to expand...
Ah. This was when the Church “invented” infant Baptism 😃

And the retort was early 17th century who knew better;)

MJ
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top