Biblical Support for Sacraments being a vehicle of grace

[guanophore]

Well if that is the case, then one writer uses baptism plus the word as a means to conversion and another writer doesn’t. So ,… what’s the real answer?.. pick and choose which writer you like best?

It often happens that the verses are interpreted within the theology/doctrinal perspective a person has received.

From an Apostolic point of view, both are true. Infants and children are baptized with the understanding that they will be made into disciples and taught how to live the faith. Those approaching the faith when they are older need to receive sufficient instruction to understand the importance and meaning of baptism.

we are talking about finding the truth concerning how or if water baptism is part of the new birth conversion. One verse uses an example of it while another verse leaves it out. You are not dealing with the problem here.

This is why we cannot consider the Scriptures to be a full compendium of the faith. It is a collection of memoirs and letters, and was never intended to answer all these questions. The faith was committed to the Church, and the Church was given this responsibility.

 

[lanman87]

From what i understand about Evangelical theology, is that Baptism and Communion (two recognized Sacraments) are “tangible” signs of the Gospel. When practiced in faith, they nourish and give us strength.

From my Southern Baptist background, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are two ordinances instituted by Christ for the Church.

Baptism is a symbol or sign of the work of the Holy Spirit that happens when someone is born again. It is generally one of the first acts of obedience to someone who’s heart has been changed by the work of the Holy Spirit. The purpose of baptism is to demonstrate obedience to Christ, give witness to a new life in Christ, and to celebrate someone coming to Christ. We baptize by immersion which is symbolic of the death of the old life and birth in the new life and follow the New Testament pattern of someone coming to faith and then being baptized. . Generally, the person doing the baptizing will say something like, “I baptize you my brother/sister in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, we are buried with Christ in baptism and raised to walk in newness of life”. In order to be baptized you have to make a “profession of faith”. Most people who make a profession of faith have some counseling with a Pastor/Teacher before Baptism to insure that they understand what exactly faith is (Trust and Surrender that results in a changed heart and life) and what it is not (Belief alone).

The Lord Supper is an ordinance of the church that was instituted by Christ. The primary purpose of the Lord’s Supper is to remind us of the Sacrifice of Christ on the cross. The Lord’s supper is a solemn reminder of just how much Christ gave for us and how totally hopeless we are without Him. The bread and the cup are symbols of the Body and Blood of Christ and the breaking of Christ body and the shedding of His blood for our sins. By taking the Lord’s supper we remember what He did for us. In the Lord’s supper we also celebrate our faith and give thanks for forgiveness of sins and relationship with God that can only be found in Christ.

The Evangelical way of thinking is that the sacraments/ordinances help us grow in grace and knowledge of Christ and are a visible way of demonstrating our faith to others. However, they do not give us grace but help us live in and understand and mature in the grace God has given and continues to give us by our trusting in Him alone for our salvation. And that they are two of the many things in a Christian life that help us grow in Grace and Knowledge. Other things include prayer, bible study, preaching, teaching, worship, giving, serving and so forth.

Another thing you may find interesting is that while generally Baptism and the Lord’s supper are administered by Pastors/Deacons, it is perfectly fine for any Christian to baptize someone or administer the Lord’s supper. For instance, if my family is traveling or dealing with some particular crisis or are just seeking to be closer to Christ, it is perfectly acceptable for me to have the Lord’s supper with my family in my home with me serving my family.

 

[rcwitness]

Interesting that you quoted no Scripture… just messin’

I would like to comment more on this when i have time.

What i find interesting is the choice of “ordinance” over commandment. And also, that it seems that Jesus commanded the Church to Baptize, and not just for believers to seek Baptism. This places a responsibility on the Church to administer Baptism, and not allow members to withhold.

Acts 22

“And one Anani′as, a devout man according to the law, well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there, 13 came to me, and standing by me said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight.’ And in that very hour I received my sight and saw him. 14 And he said, ‘The God of our fathers appointed you to know his will, to see the Just One and to hear a voice from his mouth; 15 for you will be a witness for him to all men of what you have seen and heard. 16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

 

[lanman87]

Interesting that you quoted no Scripture… just messin’

I’m not really one for Bible Baseball and try to avoid it when I can. I’ve noticed that most folks on this board know the what evangelicals use for Biblical support for their doctrine better than most evangelicals.

If you want I can give you the Baptist/Evangelical response Paul’s conversion story in Acts 16 and how it relates to his earlier in chapter 9. But if you have been on this board talking to evangelicals for a while you’ve probably already heard what I would say.

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

Interesting that you quoted no Scripture… just messin’

I’m not really one for Bible Baseball and try to avoid it when I can. I’ve noticed that most folks on this board know the what evangelicals use for Biblical support for their doctrine better than most evangelicals.

If you want I can give you the Baptist/Evangelical response Paul’s conversion story in Acts 16 and how it relates to his earlier in chapter 9. But if you have been on this board talking to evangelicals for a while you’ve probably already heard what I would say.

Hey, i was just pushin’ your buttons. It wasnt any valid point. Just humor.

And anyways, i didnt realize the Protestant Bibles had a conversion story of Paul in Acts 16!

 

[lanman87]

What i find interesting is the choice of “ordinance” over commandment. And also, that it seems that Jesus commanded the Church to Baptize, and not just for believers to seek Baptism. This places a responsibility on the Church to administer Baptism, and not allow members to withhold.

We see the great commission as three fold.

1. Make disciples. This is done by witnessing, teaching, preaching in both word and the example of what Christ has done in our own lives. This is done both personally in one to one interaction with others and corporately as those God has called to be evangelist preach and teach in church services and evangelistic events (think Billy Graham) As we evangelize God works in the hearts of people to bring them to Himself.
2. Baptize them- those who become disciples of Christ are then baptized as an act of obedience and testimony that they are now disciples of Christ.
3. Teach them- this is done by preaching, teaching, training, service and worship.

 

[lanman87]

And anyways, i didnt realize the Protestant Bibles had a conversion story of Paul in Acts 16!

It is amazing what you learn on these boards.

 

[tgGodsway]

Yes I love 1st. John 5. It is one of my favorite passages. His commandments are not burdensome at all. His greatest commandment is to love God first and love each other next.

 

[rcwitness]

Is Baptism a burden?

 

[tgGodsway]

No where does scripture contradict Peter when he says Baptism now saves you.

Is that water baptism? … holy Spirit baptism?.. a baptism unto repentance? … a baptism with fire? … how shall we interpret Peter?.. My only point is that this word is used in a variety of ways other than WATER itself. study it. I agree that water baptism should play a role in the life of a new believer. I cannot conclude that the water itself is a necessary element for a real conversion to take place, nor can I find such a scenario. Conversion itself is a spiritual transaction where one’s faith to believe Jesus is the Christ comes into play. They go from a non-believer … to a believer by their faith. None of this is connected to physical water at all. Therefore God is not limited in His saving ability to the availability of physical water present for a water baptism. If the quote “believer” has not yet been baptized in water, it is a stretch to say, their conversion is not real, or it won’t stick. That would be ludicrous. Water (symbolically) demonstrates the death, burial, and resurrection found in the life of Christ. But water in of itself does not become a spiritual bath like it would physically.

Blessings,

 

[rcwitness]

The Church does NOT Teach that Baptism is a necessary Sacrament for conversion to take place.

 

[lanman87]

The Church does NOT Teach that Baptism is a necessary Sacrament for conversion to take place.

This is interesting. From my American Evangelical mindset, being “born again” is the moment of conversion. We are born again the moment we believe/have faith/trust in Christ. For us, that is the moment we are filled with the Holy Spirit, adopted as Children of God, and made new creations in Christ. If we die 5 seconds or 5 minutes or 5 years after coming to a genuine faith in Christ we will go to heaven, regardless of if we have been baptized or not. Now I can’t see any reason for someone who has come to faith in Christ to not be baptized and 99.999% of the time in evangelical churches when someone comes to faith in Christ they are baptized within a few weeks of their conversion. However, strictly speaking they are considered “born again” before they are baptized.

Under Catholic theology, if someone comes to a genuine faith in Christ, are they considered “born again” (filled with the Holy Spirit, adopted, new creations) at conversion or at baptism?

 

[rcwitness]

Conversion of heart does not need Baptism to proceed it. In fact how could it, since at Baptism, one profesess belief. Baptism brings forgiveness and entry into the life of faith. Its not mere water, as Jon rightly stated, but the Sacrament of the Word and water. God’s name is called on (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)

 

[rcwitness]

I think we would agree on alot of things tg.

Baptism does not “make” someone a believer. The Holy Spirit (Father’s beckoning) being received in the interior of a person’s soul is what “makes” a believer.

But Baptism is a command (ordinance if you prefer) for the Church to administer, and the convert to receive as from the Lord, and not man (even though it is performed through a minister). The Rite is a means to personally receive the washing away of sins and reception into the life of the Church.

If a believer would reject Baptism, knowing it was commanded by the Lord to His Church, it is definitely a serious sin! This is why Baptism is necessary, NOT because Jesus is bound to the Sacrament, but that believers are bound to the Sacrament. But what believer would consider Baptism a chore, or burden, or work of the law? It is a blessing, grace, privilege, gift, etc.!!

 

[tgGodsway]

The Rite is a means to personally receive the washing away of sins and reception into the life of the Church.

I agree with much of what you said but right here. Water baptism is not a means to personally receive the washing away of sins. Here is why:. The very act of baptism can only serve as a natural example of Christ death, burial, and resurrection. Why? Because the act itself is natural and physical. Cleansing from sin is not accomplished by this means because sin is spiritual. A spiritual baptism is the means needed for a spiritual problem with sin. This baptism is found in 1st Cor. 12:13. Paul talks about this in Rom. 6:3 4

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

The Rite is a means to personally receive the washing away of sins and reception into the life of the Church.

I agree with much of what you said but right here. Water baptism is not a means to personally receive the washing away of sins. Here is why:. The very act of baptism can only serve as a natural example of Christ death, burial, and resurrection. Why? Because the act itself is natural and physical. Cleansing from sin is not accomplished by this means because sin is spiritual. A spiritual baptism is the means needed for a spiritual problem with sin. This baptism is found in 1st Cor. 12:13. Paul talks about this in Rom. 6:3 4

1 Corinthians 12
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

How do you know that Paul was distinguishing a separate Baptism from water Baptism? Wouldnt it be more accurate to understand water Baptism as containing the Spirit just like in Genesis 1:2? I think you and us agree that water Baptism does not guarantee a final salvation. You have just fashioned a different way of expressing salvation. That there is a “temporal” salvation and an “eternal” salvation. While we would say an “initial” salvation and a “final” salvation. Both sets of language convey a common concept; that the former is dependant on a conversion that remains until the end of one’s life!

Baptism has a component of the recipient and of the Giver. The recipient may receive and continue/remain with God or he may have received in vain and/or fallen away when trials and tribulations arose. The Giver gives according to His promise in either case. He forgives sins, washing away the guilt of the recipient with conditions that faith takes root and produces fruit.

Romans 6
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

Again, where is your evidence that Paul is differentiating this Baptism from the Sacrament???

Your whole premise relies on a concept of Assurance of Salvation. And in the sense that we cannot lose our salvation! This is contradicted within the same book by St Paul:

Romans 11
For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. And even the others, if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again

 

[guanophore]

Yes I love 1st. John 5. It is one of my favorite passages. His commandments are not burdensome at all. His greatest commandment is to love God first and love each other next.

Do you find it difficult to love devout Catholics when you are so hateful toward Catholicism?

Is that water baptism? … holy Spirit baptism?.. a baptism unto repentance? … a baptism with fire? … how shall we interpret Peter?.. My only point is that this word is used in a variety of ways other than WATER itself.

I agree, but as you have accurately pointed out, we know from the context. Peter is using the deliverance of Noah through the flood waters.

I cannot conclude that the water itself is a necessary element for a real conversion to take place, nor can I find such a scenario.

Nor do we suggest such a scenario. In baptism, the Holy Spirit applies the “circumcision made without hands”. For adults, conversion is part of this process, but for infants, the washing of regeneration is applied based on the faith of those bringing the infant.

But water in of itself does not become a spiritual bath like it would physically.

I guess you are denying that God works through material things. I suppose you would also say that mud Jesus applied to the eyes of the blind does not become a healing path spiritually as it does physically.

Under Catholic theology, if someone comes to a genuine faith in Christ, are they considered “born again” (filled with the Holy Spirit, adopted, new creations) at conversion or at baptism?

Since the Apostles never separated conversion from baptism, we do not do so either. Born again of water and spirit is baptism. We also believe that there are many "conversions’ throughout our lifetime, and that conversion is often a process.

Water baptism is not a means to personally receive the washing away of sins.

How do you wash away the Scriptures that say otherwise?

“And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.” Acts 22

The very act of baptism can only serve as a natural example of Christ death, burial, and resurrection. Why? Because the act itself is natural and physical.

I agree with you. I think that God chooses things of the natural world to demonstrate the supernatural. He created us as physical beings so providing for our physical/natural sensibilities helps us.

 

[guanophore]

Cleansing from sin is not accomplished by this means because sin is spiritual. A spiritual baptism is the means needed for a spiritual problem with sin.

Jesus joined the Holy Spirit to the waters of the Jordan when He entered them, and since that time, the Holy Spirit has never been separated from baptism into Christ. You are right, spiritual problems must be addressed on the spiritual level, through a circumcision made without hands, by the Holy Spirit. Jesus taught that this occurs through baptism of water AND spirit.

It is significant that this is the understanding of the Church for 1500 years, until the Anabaptists emerged. One would think that Jesus would not be so weak or disinterested in HIs Church that He could not find ANYONE during those centuries to correct this misunderstanding!

 

[Wannano]

tgGodsway:

Cleansing from sin is not accomplished by this means because sin is spiritual. A spiritual baptism is the means needed for a spiritual problem with sin.

Jesus joined the Holy Spirit to the waters of the Jordan when He entered them, and since that time, the Holy Spirit has never been separated from baptism into Christ. You are right, spiritual problems must be addressed on the spiritual level, through a circumcision made without hands, by the Holy Spirit. Jesus taught that this occurs through baptism of water AND spirit.

It is significant that this is the understanding of the Church for 1500 years, until the Anabaptists emerged. One would think that Jesus would not be so weak or disinterested in HIs Church that He could not find ANYONE during those centuries to correct this misunderstanding!

I am a bit confused. Jesus joined the Holy Spirit to the waters of the Jordan…what are you saying? The Holy Spirit has never been separated from baptism into Christ? I thought the Holy Spirit for the Catholic is received at confirmation. Isn’t it the Orthodox who receive the Holy Spirit at baptism?

Anabaptistic thought was not original with the Anabaptists of the 1500s. What about the Waldensians etc.?

 

[po18guy]

False premise.
Where did Jesus teach bible alone?
Where did Jesus write anything to be preserved?
Where did Jesus teach that His followers must go to the written page to solve disputes?
Where did Jesus command the writing of anything?
Where is biblical support for the New Testament?
Where is biblical support for the contents of the bible itself?
Where did the sacred table of contents come from?
Why 27 NT books and not 15 or 45?
None of this is found in the scriptures. Zero. Zip. Nada.
The bible is what it is solely because the Church has ruled so.
This is a total shock for “bible-based” communities, as Jesus taught no such thing.