Debating CoC preacher about Infant Baptism

[Tiberius1701]

Not to derail the topic, but I have a question that is indeed germane to the issue of baptism. Some posters hold the position that the Bible explicitly states full immersion is necessary. If not explicit, it is so obviously implicit that it may as well be explicit. They also hold that “scripture interprets scripture”, which is a bit confusing to those of us who have never used that concept / precept.

Therefore, it appears their position is that the Bible is the ultimate authority to which we must appeal on these matters.

My question? Where does the Bible get this authority? If I were staking their eternal salvation on a book, I would certainly want to know everything about this book! Where did it come from? When were its contents decided? Who made that decision? What makes them right or authoritative? If God is alive and continues His work today, why is it that nothing can be added to the book?

This seems to be key in the discussion, as there are Catholics who appeal to sources in addition to the Bible (tradition, writings of the early church fathers, etc.). Once this matter is settled, perhaps we can make progress on this issue.

((You know, with all the simleys we have here, there should really be a high-five smiley… ))

 

[ctkrcia]

Where does it teach that only a few blessed individuals can understand Scripture? Also, can you find an account of someone being sprinkled or poured upon with water for baptism.

As to the first question, see 1 Tim 3:15, “…the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” Also, see Matt 18:15-18, " "If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.

Sounds like to me the church is the final authority. The church is who we look to in order to understand Scripture. It is not an individual or a “me and Jesus” kind of thing.

The second question is exactly the point other have been making. NOWHERE in Scripture does it describe the exact method of using water in baptism. Therefore, we should look to writings of the early church to know what was being done by the apostles and their successors. See this article from Catholic Answers for citations from the early church writings.

As has been stated here before, the Catholic church recognizes that full immersion is the most proper method of baptism. But it is not restricted to that in order for baptism to be effective on the person receiving it.

 

[Tiberius1701]

As to the first question, see 1 Tim 3:15, “…the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” Also, see Matt 18:15-18, " "If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.

Sounds like to me the church is the final authority. The church is who we look to in order to understand Scripture. It is not an individual or a “me and Jesus” kind of thing.

I’d also like to add that, while we fully expect you to try to attempt tp counter the authority of the Church with John 16:13a, which says, “When the Spirit of Truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth,” we also expect that you won’t bother to “let Scritpure interpret Scripture” in the case of John 16:13. What I mean by this is that you won’t bother to acknowledge the context of the verse, which is not one of Jesus’ oratories to the masses. This verse was said exclusively to the Twelve in the confines of the Upper Room the night before His Passion. So, if you were to “let Scripture interpret Scripture” in the case of the non-Catholic’s favorite “we can interpret all we want 'cause we have the Spirit of Truth” verse, you’d find that it actually supports the Catholic Church’s claim, not the arm-chair theologian’s case. Look at the context with unbiased eyes, stevekehl, and you’ll see that I’m telling the truth.

 

[Nicea325]

Where does it teach that only a few blessed individuals can understand Scripture? Also, can you find an account of someone being sprinkled or poured upon with water for baptism.

And where does Scripture say everyone is blessed to read it without error?

And see that is your error: The belief the Bible has to SAY IT EXPLICITLY or else it is false. Jesus founded His Church,He did not found a Bible-Only faith. Care to show me where one of the Apostles expliciltly explains the 3 distinct persons of the Trinitarian doctrine? Guess what? Not one does,but it was the church. Where does one Apostle even mention the canon of Scripture? Where does Scripture mention a canon?

Oh I see,since not one account of being sprinkled or poured is not found in scripture it is false? Apparently you do not read early church history do you? Again,no where is FULL IMMERSION stated as the ONLY method…no where. That is your injection and subjectiveness.

 

[Savo74]

I’m going to guess that these have been run before, but is there any reason that Acts 2:38-39 should be dismissed when referencing infant baptism:

((38 Peter replied, “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. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.” ))

And a quick copy/paste from a site I saw stated this, but I’m not sure it’s all true:

In this verse (“I…baptize you with water. He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire”) three baptisms are mentioned: with water, with the Holy Spirit, with fire. If baptism always and invariably means immersion, this verse speaks of an immersion in water an immersion in the Holy Spirit, and an immersion in fire.

How does the Bible describe these three baptisms? The only description of the baptism with fire is in Acts 2:3: “There appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire; and it sat upon each of them.” Accepting this language as a correct description (as we must), the baptism with fire could not have been an immersion in fire. “Sat upon” does not describe an immersion.

The 2nd chapter of Acts does not describe the mode of baptism with the Holy Spirit, but it is described in Acts 11:15: “The Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.” Every description of the baptism with the Holy Spirit represents Him as coming upon, being poured out, put in or within, sent upon, falling upon, descending upon, etc. Not one expression admits the idea of immersion in the Holy Spirit. How, then, can the claim be maintained that baptism is always and invariably immersion when two out of three baptisms of Matthew 3:11 cannot be immersion? ))

 

[NotWorthy]

I’d say it is fairly explicit, and doesn’t require any interpretation.

The words “Buried in baptism” are used, and compared to death. The metaphor compares baptism to burial in a grave, i.e. submerged beneath the earth. What doubt is there that the intent of that baptism is to be fully submerged beneath the water?

I ‘humbly’ submit that the case for full submersion during baptism is much more explicit in scripture than the case for infant baptism, which was the original topic.

And yet you don’t see the connection between infant baptism and circumcision, which happens to infants on the 8th day?!?!?

Hmmmmm…

 

[NotWorthy]

Scripture interprets scripture? Really where does scripture teach scripture interpretating itself? Finally, no where do the above verses teach full immersion is the ONLY acceptable method.

Regarding Scripture interpreting Scripture… I don’t think St. Peter felt that St. Paul’s Scriptures could interpret themselves.

 

[Tiberius1701]

And yet you don’t see the connection between infant baptism and circumcision, which happens to infants on the 8th day?!?!?

Hmmmmm…

Maybe if he takes off his “The Catholic Church Is Always Wrong” glasses he’ll be able to see these otherwise fairly obvious connections?

 

[Nicea325]

Regarding Scripture interpreting Scripture… I don’t think St. Peter felt that St. Paul’s Scriptures could interpret themselves.

Of course not! That is the whole issue with the Bible-Only approach.Jesus did not teach if it is not written down explicitly,then do not believe it. I do not understand how they cannot see it from scripture Jesus’ founded His Church. He did not hand out Bibles.

 

[stevekehl]

And where does Scripture say everyone is blessed to read it without error?

And see that is your error: The belief the Bible has to SAY IT EXPLICITLY or else it is false. Jesus founded His Church,He did not found a Bible-Only faith. Care to show me where one of the Apostles expliciltly explains the 3 distinct persons of the Trinitarian doctrine? Guess what? Not one does,but it was the church. Where does one Apostle even mention the canon of Scripture? Where does Scripture mention a canon?

Oh I see,since not one account of being sprinkled or poured is not found in scripture it is false? Apparently you do not read early church history do you? Again,no where is FULL IMMERSION stated as the ONLY method…no where. That is your injection and subjectiveness.

Let’s look at what Scripture has to say about the authority of Scripture. Early in the Bible we read that the study of Scripture is as important to life as bread and comes from the mouth of God.
Deu 8:3 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.
Jeus later echoed these words when tempted by Satan.
Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
So if Scripture is this important we must be initmately familiar with it, not let someone else tell us what is says without investigations. Jesus familiarity with Scripture is evident when He was discussing Scripture with the learned men at the temple.
Luk 2:46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. 47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. 48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. 49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?
Continued next post

 

[stevekehl]

So discussion, debate, and questions about Scripture are not only important, but part of God’s business. This is evident in Jewish worship, where any young man over 13 could comment on the Scripture read that day. While it is true these young men recieved schooling before they could participate consider the knowledge and maturity of the average eighth grader, now imagine them commenting on sermons in church. Surely Jesus, raised in this religious culture, and God, whose commandments structured Jewish worship, do not oppose discussion and debate of new ideas, which are defended and refuted by Scripture.
So did the early church have Scripture? I believe they did. Paul, writting to Timothy spoke to the authority of Scripture and its role for the Christian.
2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
So knowledge of the Scriptures can make us wise unto salvation,and the authority of Paul is confirmed by Peter.
2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Peter accepted Paul’s episles as Scripture, and Paul’s teachings were not confined to a few churches.
Col 4:15 Give my greetings to the followers at Laodicea, especially to Nympha and the church that meets in her home. 16 After this letter has been read to your people, be sure to have it read in the church at Laodicea. And you should read the letter that I have sent to them.
This verse shows that Paul intended congregations to share his letters, which Peter called Scripture. Peter’s letters were written to Christians in Asia Minor. Of course there was the Old Testament available, thus there was Scripture available to early congregations. New followers even tested Paul’s message, using Scripture.
Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Since we know that Paul and Peter were both executed in the mid to late 60s AD this means most of what would become the New Testament was written within about 35 years of Jesus death.
So we can see that God expects us to be familiar with His word, there is over 5,000 years of debate and discussion, beginning with early Judaism, of God’s Word, all Scripture was insipired by God, the early church had Scripture, both Old Testament and much of what would become the New Testament.
As for the Trinity, study of the New Testament reveals the three in one God beginning with the Gospel of Luke.
Luk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
We see Father, Son, and Holy Ghost present when Jesus is placed in Mary’s womb. And Jesus Himself spoke of the Trinity at the end of Matthew.
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Lastly, the Scriptures don’t say a lot of things about baptism, the Bible doesn’t forbid baptizing with mud, or using a squirt gun, or just washing the hands, or feet. But what the Bible does say is that no one is able to judge the salvation of another, which I have stated before. Anyone coming to the church where I worship is welcome and those who claim they are a Christian can recieve communion, unconditionally. I’m not going to ask someone where they were baptized, was it by immersion, were they an infant, have they participated in any doctrinal training, etc., etc., etc… I have no illusions about what I write here. I doubt anyone is going to read this and have a radical change of mind. i simple want to explain what I believe, why I believe it, and the Scripture behind it. As long as you believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, that He was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life as a man, died for your sins, rose on the third day and in Him dwelt the fullness of God I’ll be glad to call you brother or sister. Hope everyone enjoys the coming holiday, that is if the world doesn’t end (tired chuckle).

 

[NotWorthy]

Steve,

Great post, but where in all of that does it say that Scripture is the authority? When Scripture speaks of authority, it is giving this authority to the Church.

 

[ctkrcia]

My brother in Christ, Steve. First of all, GREAT POST!!! I heartily agree with your position on the importance and inspiration of scripture. However, the question posed remains unanswered.

Where in scripture does it say every tenant of belief, every practice, every word of praise must be in scripture? If that were the case, how far should it be taken? In the Gospels, it states that Jesus took the bread and the cup. Given that, wouldn’t the only way to share communion would be with ONE bread and ONE cup? Scripture states that women are to remain silent in the church. Should women be allowed to lead Sunday School? Should there be Sunday School at all? Where in scripture does it specifically say to have summer camps for youth? For that matter, where in scripture does it say to build a church building and worship there instead of the homes of believers?

 

[Link0126]

Where does it teach that only a few blessed individuals can understand Scripture?

“Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.”
2 Peter 1:20-21

 

[Randy_Carson]

Where does it teach that only a few blessed individuals can understand Scripture?

Nowhere. Which is why this is NOT Catholic theology.

Also, can you find an account of someone being sprinkled or poured upon with water for baptism.

Sure. Just not in scripture. But that does not mean that’s not how the earliest Christians baptized…as other non-scriptural writings reveal.

 

[Nicea325]

Let’s look at what Scripture has to say about the authority of Scripture. Early in the Bible we read that the study of Scripture is as important to life as bread and comes from the mouth of God.
Deu 8:3 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.
Jeus later echoed these words when tempted by Satan.
Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
So if Scripture is this important we must be initmately familiar with it, not let someone else tell us what is says without investigations. Jesus familiarity with Scripture is evident when He was discussing Scripture with the learned men at the temple.
Luk 2:46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. 47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. 48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. 49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?
Continued next post

Indeed, the above is scripture the inspired Word of God,however,it still did not answer any of my questions.

Care to show me where one of the Apostles expliciltly explains the 3 distinct persons of the Trinitarian doctrine?

Where does one Apostle explicitly mention the canon of Scripture? Where does Scripture mention a canon for the NT?

 

[Nicea325]

So did the early church have Scripture? I believe they did. Paul, writting to Timothy spoke to the authority of Scripture and its role for the Christian

.

Yes,but was did St.Paul have a one volume Bible with the OT/NT as we have today? No! Other writings also existed,which did not make the final cut.Where does Paul or any of the 12 teach Scripture is THE only authority?

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

The above has been taken out-of-context so many times, I am not even going to go there again. But I’ll give you this much, look at the first word of verse 16: ALL scripture… It does not read: ONLY scripture is…Finally,was Paul writing in defense of the Bible-Only? Absolutely not!

So knowledge of the Scriptures can make us wise unto salvation,and the authority of Paul is confirmed by Peter.

Yes,but where does the above state ONLY scripture can make us wise unto salvation? What about the millions who have no Bible to read? Are they doomed since salvation hinges on scripture-only?

 

[stevekehl]

Steve,

Great post, but where in all of that does it say that Scripture is the authority? When Scripture speaks of authority, it is giving this authority to the Church.

The exact phrase “The word of the Lord” appears 255 in the KJV (I’m not a KJV only person, but a lot of people use it). If 255 prophecies, teachings, messages, etc… were preceded by the word of the Lord I think that is pretty authoritative. This doesn’t include other Scriptures like
Matt 22:43 Jesus replied, "How then could the Spirit lead David to call the Messiah his Lord? David said, Where Jesus affirms the Holy Spirit spoke through King David. Lastly, if the early church and early Cathlic Church didn’t believe in the authority of Scripture, why did men spend so much time and care compiling, preserving and copying Scripture for future generations?

 

[NotWorthy]

The exact phrase “The word of the Lord” appears 255 in the KJV (I’m not a KJV only person, but a lot of people use it). If 255 prophecies, teachings, messages, etc… were preceded by the word of the Lord I think that is pretty authoritative. This doesn’t include other Scriptures like
Matt 22:43 Jesus replied, "How then could the Spirit lead David to call the Messiah his Lord? David said, Where Jesus affirms the Holy Spirit spoke through King David. Lastly, if the early church and early Cathlic Church didn’t believe in the authority of Scripture, why did men spend so much time and care compiling, preserving and copying Scripture for future generations?

My friend, Scripture is authoritative, especially in the Catholic Church… don’t ever doubt that. But Scripture tells us that the Church is authoritative. And Scripture tells us to follow the traditions handed down.

So, to put things in their proper place, Scripture is part of a three legged stool:

1. Scripture
2. Sacred Tradition
3. The teaching Magisterium of the Church.

I can see why other churches don’t follow this line of teaching because, well… they only have one of the three legs. So I understand your predicament, Steve.

 

[stevekehl]

My brother in Christ, Steve. First of all, GREAT POST!!! I heartily agree with your position on the importance and inspiration of scripture. However, the question posed remains unanswered.

Where in scripture does it say every tenant of belief, every practice, every word of praise must be in scripture? If that were the case, how far should it be taken? In the Gospels, it states that Jesus took the bread and the cup. Given that, wouldn’t the only way to share communion would be with ONE bread and ONE cup? Scripture states that women are to remain silent in the church. Should women be allowed to lead Sunday School? Should there be Sunday School at all? Where in scripture does it specifically say to have summer camps for youth? For that matter, where in scripture does it say to build a church building and worship there instead of the homes of believers?

Sorry this reply has taken so long. Nursing school, final exams, softball games, holiday camping, etc… I don’t think every practice or praise must be found in Scripture. Since you mentioned communion; some people go to mass every day and receive communion, others go a few times a week, others once a week, some denominations have communion on the first Sunday of the month, others 4 or 5 times a year, some do break a single piece of unleavened bread, some use crackers. I think all of these are fine, Jesus just said remember Me when you do this. However, beliefs surrounding salvation I do believe must be guided by Scripture, Jesus divinity, the virgin birth, Christ’s sinless life and perfect sacrifice, the resurrection, appearances and ascension of Jesus, grace, faith, repentance, baptism, evangelism, forgiveness, love, charity, instructions on how to live for God, Scripture is the final authority. As I posted earlier, the early church would not have given such care to preserve and exactly copy Scripture if the Traditions and ECF writings were of equally authority. For issues like women participating in church Paul writes it is disgraceful for women to speak in church, but also writes women should cover their head before they offer a prayer. I think this refers to the Jewish practice of offering comments on the Scripture read for worship, others interpret this as women shouldn’t socialize or gossip on Sunday mornings. Men can instruct anyone, women are to instruct younger women and children, whether that’s on Sunday morning or at church camp makes no difference. For brevity’s sake I’ll close with this explaination, just because a person in authority tells me something or a tradition is followed doesn’t mean I will accept it. Whatever the topic or situation it must have Scriptural support for me to accept it. Looking forward to your comments.