This is correct. We are born again of water and spirit as it says in John 3. We are forgiven all previous sin and are born anew with sufficient grace to be saved and a calling to live in holiness and obedience within the Church.Is this accurate?
Catholics believe that being born again happens at baptism. The baptizer submerges or pours water on the person to baptized, original sin is removed and the Holy Spirit sanctifies, “born again”
Yes that is also the constant belief of the Early Christians from the first several centuries.Is this accurate?
Catholics believe that being born again happens at baptism. The baptizer submerges or pours water on the person to baptized, original sin is removed and the Holy Spirit sanctifies, “born again”
I don’t think that is necessarily true. The baptizing of infants tends to lead people to believe that baptism is necessary for salvation. Tertullian made a good case against baptizing small children and what he said makes perfect sense.Yes that is also the constant belief of the Early Christians from the first several centuries.
God, many times, uses a physical object to give grace. The lamb’s blood had to be smeared over the door. Israel didn’t just believe God, they obeyed. Abraham didn’t just beleive God, he obeyed, and once he actually did what God commanded, then it was said he believed God. The belief is in the doing. Unless a man is born of spirit he shall…no but what does the Gospel say?..unless a man is born of water and spirit. If God has made clear this is how he will give grace, who are we to say, no no, its the spirit without the water?I don’t think that is necessarily true. The baptizing of infants tends to lead people to believe that baptism is necessary for salvation. Tertullian made a good case against baptizing small children and what he said makes perfect sense.
Baptism is necessary in the sense that we are commanded to do it and by it our sins are washed away, but the prerequisite is that we understand what we are doing. Even the Catholic Church believes in baptism of desire. So the physical act of being baptized carries little weight with regard to salvation. It might better be stated that if one refuses to be baptized, or thinks it is completely unnecessary to do so, they are not following the commandment of Christ, and thus their salvation is questionable.
I believe that being born again is what the act of baptism represents. In other words, it’s not the “work” of baptism that saves; it’s the act of believing, repenting, and following through in obedience with baptism.
I agree with that .It’s the pattern through out scriptureI believe that being born again is what the act of baptism represents. In other words, it’s not the “work” of baptism that saves; it’s the act of believing, repenting, and following through in obedience with baptism.
I respectfully disagree that infant baptism is necessary because I believe that repentance is a necessary part of baptism. Infants cannot repent, nor do they need to. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we will be judged according to Adam’s sin; it says we will be judged according to our works. An infant’s salvation is dependant upon Christ who reconciled Adam’s sin at the cross. That, as you know, is a done deal. If someone looses their small child in this world, they need not be burdened by the thought that their child is not saved because it he or she was not baptized. God’s grace is sufficient for them.I think that infant Baptism is totally legitimate and necessary.
Hi Brian,I don’t think that is necessarily true. The baptizing of infants tends to lead people to believe that baptism is necessary for salvation. Tertullian made a good case against baptizing small children and what he said makes perfect sense.
Baptism is necessary in the sense that we are commanded to do it and by it our sins are washed away, but the prerequisite is that we understand what we are doing. Even the Catholic Church believes in baptism of desire. So the physical act of being baptized carries little weight with regard to salvation. It might better be stated that if one refuses to be baptized, or thinks it is completely unnecessary to do so, they are not following the commandment of Christ, and thus their salvation is questionable.
I believe that being born again is what the act of baptism represents. In other words, it’s not the “work” of baptism that saves; it’s the act of believing, repenting, and following through in obedience with baptism.
The Church half agrees with you. Unbaptised Children do not necessarily go to hell.I respectfully disagree that infant baptism is necessary because I believe that repentance is a necessary part of baptism. Infants cannot repent, nor do they need to. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we will be judged according to Adam’s sin; it says we will be judged according to our works. An infant’s salvation is dependant upon Christ who reconciled Adam’s sin at the cross. That, as you know, is a done deal. If someone looses their small child in this world, they need not be burdened by the thought that their child is not saved because it he or she was not baptized. God’s grace is sufficient for them.
Brian,I respectfully disagree that infant baptism is necessary because I believe that repentance is a necessary part of baptism. Infants cannot repent, nor do they need to. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we will be judged according to Adam’s sin; it says we will be judged according to our works. An infant’s salvation is dependant upon Christ who reconciled Adam’s sin at the cross. That, as you know, is a done deal. If someone looses their small child in this world, they need not be burdened by the thought that their child is not saved because it he or she was not baptized. God’s grace is sufficient for them.
Why would you think that. The converts asked Peter what they should do and he responded: (Acts 2: 38-39): Peter (said) to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will callI agree with that .It’s the pattern through out scripture
Hear the word , repentance, baptism…Peter preached his first sermon…3,000 were added to the church that day…I’m willing to bet they weren’t all baptized that same day…
Brian, there are three benefits to being Baptized in the Catholic Church:I respectfully disagree that infant baptism is necessary because I believe that repentance is a necessary part of baptism. Infants cannot repent, nor do they need to. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we will be judged according to Adam’s sin; it says we will be judged according to our works. An infant’s salvation is dependant upon Christ who reconciled Adam’s sin at the cross. That, as you know, is a done deal. If someone looses their small child in this world, they need not be burdened by the thought that their child is not saved because it he or she was not baptized. God’s grace is sufficient for them.
I read that and see it’s a continual ongoing from generation to generation…That’s why we train up children in His ways…My one daughter was about seven when she understood it and responded…They preached to households and I can see all ages responding…I just don’t see them baptizing babies…Even if they adopted it along the way, I don’t see the apostles doing it…Hey if I was wrong and waited till my children responded to the gospel then so be it…I’ll find out on the other side…Why would you think that. The converts asked Peter what they should do and he responded: (Acts 2: 38-39): Peter (said) to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call
Given that, why wouldn’t they be baptized, and their children as well?
Well, that’s okay. As long as your respectful. Reasonable people can disagree. I have a lot of protestant friends. We’ve had many discussion and disagreements about our Faith. I stress “our”. I always begin and end such discussions by saying that we should not allow our doctrinal differences to divide us one from the other. In the end, God will reveal all. Let us instead stand fast and firmly on our unity in Faith that Christ is salvation. How’s that?I respectfully disagree that infant baptism is necessary because I believe that repentance is a necessary part of baptism. Infants cannot repent, nor do they need to. Nowhere in the Bible does it say we will be judged according to Adam’s sin; it says we will be judged according to our works. An infant’s salvation is dependant upon Christ who reconciled Adam’s sin at the cross. That, as you know, is a done deal. If someone looses their small child in this world, they need not be burdened by the thought that their child is not saved because it he or she was not baptized. God’s grace is sufficient for them.
Have you posted this before? I felt like I have read it before. Maybe in the catechism? Either way: Right on, Right on, Right on!!Two more points to add about infant baptism. Baptism is the rite we follow to bring someone into God’s family. In the Old Covenant, this was done on the 8th day with circumcision. We know that the New Covenant is better than the Old Covenant. So if in the Old children were entered into the covenant as infants, why would we have a New Covenant that was inferior and only allowed people to enter when they reached the age of reason? It’s not logical.
The second point is that in Acts it says that whole households were baptized. One can assume that included the children in those households. Otherwise it wouldn’t be the whole household. Certainly most of those baptized were adults, because everyone needed to be baptized. But, just like Abraham when God gave the Old Covenant, most of those who were circumcised were men because everyone needed to be brought in.
So infant baptism is not only valid, but expected given the Old Covenant.
Catholic Answers has three tracts on this subject: Early Teachings of Infant Baptism, Infant Baptism, and Born Again in Baptism.
It is. See I Peter 3:21I don’t think that is necessarily true. The baptizing of infants tends to lead people to believe that baptism is necessary for salvation.