Do Sacraments Save?

[Linkowski]

In your highly fallible modern post reformation interpretation perhaps. Not according to the Word of God.

Do sacraments impart grace by the will of God?

What does the Word of God say?

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name.

You love this scripture despite the fact that calling on His name is associated with the washing away of sin and you know from scripture that the Spirit of God is received at the hearing of faith.

Ga 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Ac 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

John 7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

(not yet glorified - but he is speaking of after He would be in response to your previous issue with this citation)

Grace is the means by which we do meaningful works of charity. Nowhere are we told that a ritualistic procedure imparts grace. I wonder if the procedure that I went through in confirmation is what Paul did when he “confirmed” or strengthened the churches.

 

[NotWorthy]

Grace is the means by which we do meaningful works of charity. Nowhere are we told that a ritualistic procedure imparts grace. I wonder if the procedure that I went through in confirmation is what Paul did when he “confirmed” or strengthened the churches.

Would St. Peter agree with you? Doesn’t he tell us that Baptism saves you know?

 

[Linkowski]

Would St. Peter agree with you? Doesn’t he tell us that Baptism saves you know?

1Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

It seems he needed to qualify that statement.

 

[mikeledes]

1Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

It seems he needed to qualify that statement.

Because it is not the water itself that saves. The water, combined with the invocation of the Trinity, is only the means by which God confers His gift.

Acts 2:38 states:

**38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. **

Be baptized for what? For the remission of sins.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[NotWorthy]

1Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

It seems he needed to qualify that statement.

Yeah, it doesn’t save us by washing away our filth, it saves us by the Grace of God (the answer of a good conscience toward God). It does not say the Good Conscience saves us. It says that Baptism, as the answer of this good conscience, is what saves us.

IOW, you don’t just have to believe, you have to believe AND OBEY!!!

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Anyone who doesn’t believe that Baptism saves doesn’t believe in Peter’s words inerrantly inspired by the Holy Spirit in the Holy Bible!

 

[Linkowski]

Ga 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

At the hearing of faith (see Romans 10), we receive the Holy Spirit and are already regenerated - putting our faith in Christ and passing from death to life - being born again. Baptism follows…are we saved at the moment we are baptized??? Or once we are baptized in the Spirit???

Acting out of Galatians 3:2:

Ac 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

John 7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

This is why Peter says what he says…

1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

 

[gardenswithkids]

At the hearing of faith (see Romans 10), we receive the Holy Spirit and are already regenerated - putting our faith in Christ and passing from death to life - being born again. Baptism follows…are we saved at the moment we are baptized??? Or once we are baptized in the Spirit???

Jesus tells us in John 3:5 we are to be born again of water and the spirit.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Born_Again_in_Baptism.asp

One key Scripture reference to being “born again” or “regenerated” is John 3:5, where Jesus says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

This verse is so important that those who say baptism is just a symbol must deny that Jesus here refers to baptism. “Born again” Christians claim the “water” is the preached word of God.

But the early Christians uniformly identified this verse with baptism. Water baptism is the way, they said, that we are born again and receive new life—a fact that is supported elsewhere in Scripture (Rom. 6:3–4; Col. 2:12–13; Titus 3:5).

No Church Father referred to John 3:5 as anything other than water baptism.

 

[gardenswithkids]

…Ac 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

You left out verse 48.
47 “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have?” 48 He ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

 

[Linkowski]

You left out verse 48.
47 “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people, who have received the holy Spirit even as we have?” 48 He ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

The idea that we are discussing here is whether or not baptism saves. We must be baptized - but - does it save a person. Apart from faith - it means nothing…“faith” apart from baptism means nothing. I honestly struggle with this - but - what I struggle more with is babies being regenerated.

 

[NotWorthy]

The idea that we are discussing here is whether or not baptism saves. We must be baptized - but - does it save a person. Apart from faith - it means nothing…“faith” apart from baptism means nothing. I honestly struggle with this - but - what I struggle more with is babies being regenerated.

But where is your faith without baptism? Where is your faith if you refuse to be obedient to Christ’s commands. Yes, baptism without faith is an empty ritural, but faith without baptism is just as empty.

Regarding infants, who said infants are baptized without faith? Don’t the parents faith mean nothing?

On a side note, Link, you can continue this struggle on either of the other two infant baptism threads that are going on.

 

[6glargento]

This is why Peter says what he says…

1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

when peter says “not a removal of dirt form the body…”

he means that baptsim is more than just a washing that cleans the outside but that it has an interior effect. The dirt is not talking about sin its talking about literal dirt.

 

[Teflon93]

But where is your faith without baptism? Where is your faith if you refuse to be obedient to Christ’s commands. Yes, baptism without faith is an empty ritural, but faith without baptism is just as empty.

Regarding infants, who said infants are baptized without faith? Don’t the parents faith mean nothing?

On a side note, Link, you can continue this struggle on either of the other two infant baptism threads that are going on.

Luke 6:46 seems particularly relevant:

46: And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?
47: Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:
48: He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
49: But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

As noted elsewhere, the fundamental difference between Catholic and Protestant definitions of faith is that faith = belief + obedience for Catholics but faith = belief for many Protestants.

There is no infant baptism conundrum—Christ told us to baptize with water in his name; he told us to hinder not the little ones from coming to him; why would we wait to baptize our children? We believe in Christ, and we obey him. Otherwise, we cannot claim to have faith.

 

[Linkowski]

Luke 6:46 seems particularly relevant:

As noted elsewhere, the fundamental difference between Catholic and Protestant definitions of faith is that faith = belief + obedience for Catholics but faith = belief for many Protestants.

There is no infant baptism conundrum—Christ told us to baptize with water in his name; he told us to hinder not the little ones from coming to him; why would we wait to baptize our children? We believe in Christ, and we obey him. Otherwise, we cannot claim to have faith.

You guys are not understanding me very well…I agree with you - BUT - we are justified by faith - A certain kind of faith - an obedient faith and we possess this AND the Holy Spirit prior to Baptism. I have already said - faith without baptism AND baptism with faith are nothing. Also, baptism is a sacrament and that is what we are talking about. I am going to stick with this thread.

 

[Teflon93]

You guys are not understanding me very well…I agree with you - BUT - we are justified by faith - A certain kind of faith - an obedient faith and we possess this AND the Holy Spirit prior to Baptism. I have already said - faith without baptism AND baptism with faith are nothing. Also, baptism is a sacrament and that is what we are talking about. I am going to stick with this thread.

Hi Craig-

I wasn’t disagreeing with you, but merely elaborating on the need for obedience as well as belief/trust in Christ. Where I would differ from you is in the timing—baptism confers the grace of God, which is why we Catholics do it as soon as possible. It transforms the human heart as it washes away the stain of original sin which warps it. It awakens the conscience, and makes possible a yearning for God that is the seed of true faith.

In the Catholic view, then, baptism is a necessary predicate for faith. Baptism precedes faith. Now, this is complicated surely by the different types of baptism we recognize—water, blood, desire. But to be part of the Body of Christ, one must be baptized via one or more of these.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

The scriptures say that entire households were Baptized.

What part of entire households Including infants do people not understand?

What part of Infant baptism Not including the infant;'s faith or assent at the moment of their Baptism do people Not understand?

What part Salvation of that infant by Baptism do people not understand?

I don’t think people are dumb enough Not to understand it–I think they do understand it but choose to believe whatever they want to believe!

 

[Teflon93]

The scriptures say that entire households were Baptized.

What part of entire households Including infants do people not understand?

What part of Infant baptism Not including the infant;'s faith or assent at the moment of their Baptism do people Not understand?

What part Salvation of that infant by Baptism do people not understand?

I don’t think people are dumb enough Not to understand it–I think they do understand it but choose to believe whatever they want to believe!

It is also worth noting that “entire households” in the 1st century were teeming with children because of high mortality rates pre-adulthood and that one’s children were also one’s workforce and retirement plan. Lots of babies, lots of infant baptisms to do.

 

[JimG]

Faith + Baptism + Obedience: all are needed.

Christ commands us to baptize. He comands obedience. He commands faith.
Why separate them?

 

[upbeatjonm]

It is also worth noting that “entire households” in the 1st century were teeming with children because of high mortality rates pre-adulthood and that one’s children were also one’s workforce and retirement plan. Lots of babies, lots of infant baptisms to do.

On infant baptism, I understand that the early church fathers debated whether or not to baptize on the 8th day, like the Jewish presentation rite, or to do it sooner. The debate was not whether to baptize infants or not.

 

[JimG]

It seems to me that protestant tradition carries such an innate fear of “works” that it is nearly obsessive in nature. The emphasis seems to be that there is nothing at all that we can do to effect our salvation; consequently any sort of “works” must be downplayed.

It’s unusual, because there is nothing in Christian history before the Reformation era that shows any similar obsession with “faith alone.”

This deep seated fear of “works,” fear of allowing anyone or anything to intervene between God and man except faith alone, prevents one from taking note of all the numerous times in the NT that Jesus commands obedience, commands baptism, commands us to repeat the Eucharist, commands us to treat our neighbor as ourselves, commands us to DO things. It especially resists looking realistically at the account of the Last Judgment given by Jesus in Matthew 26:31ff, where the judge of the world is apparently separating the saved from the damned and sending them off to their respective destinations, based on what they have done in this life.

Also, because Paul faced such problem with the Judaizers, who after becoming Christians, thought it necessary to continue to follow the precepts of the Jewish Law, he, Paul, had to make quite a point that works of the Law did not save them. But not many today have an obsession with following all the aspects of Jewish Law. So readers tend to transpose his admonitions about the works of the Jewish Law into an injunction against all works entirely. But that’s not what he says, and that’s not what Jesus commands.

Many passages have been cited in this thread showing the need for good works. And going by Matt 26:31ff alone, one would be ill prepared to approach the judgment seat telling Christ that, “I’ve got faith, and that’s all I need.” In the last judgment passage, he didn’t even ask about faith.

I don’t think Jesus makes such a separation. He commands both, he expects both.