For those who were or are Evangelical. Is being saved more important than Baptism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WildCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jon_S said:
How is it Evangelical Bashing to share my experience? I clearly stated it was my experience in large evangelical churches. I would be happy to hear about your church that does not idolize the pastor and worship leader, that focuses on God and serving the community above building buildings and putting on shows.

I am including you in my prayers today for your family tragedy and I seriously would love the opportunity to hear about your experience.

I think what you see here is not so much Evangelical bashing, but excitement over new found Catholic Worship and liturgy and finding the fullness of Biblical truth.

God Bless,

Jon
Click to expand...
i also don’t intend to bash Evangelicals I know there are Evangelicals who love God with all their hearts but they don’t know the fullness they miss by not being Catholic. It has also been my experience as an Evangelical that too many worship the pastor or song leader rather than Jesus. Not to mention the whole thing resembles a concert rather than a worship of God.🤷
 
ltwin said:
No evangelical that I know of teaches that infant children go to hell. Someone who believed that would quite frankly believe in a God that was a monster.
Click to expand...
Well, there are some Calvinist evangelicals who believe exactly this. God has predestined some souls to go to hell. It is part of His Sovereign Will. That could be infants, right?
 
ltwin said:
Baptism is an expression of faith in Christ. It is an expression ordained of God. It is a burial of the old man (which is why many evangelicals believe it should be done as soon as possible after conversion so the spiritual commitment can be sealed). It follows that we would not baptize anyone unless they already believed.
Click to expand...
In late on this thread and not sure if this has been put forth so here goes…

And the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: “The Lord himself affirms that baptism is necessary for salvation [John 3:5]. . . . Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament [Mark 16:16]” (CCC 1257).
 
Salvation does not come without baptism of some form. So, being saved is not “more important” than Baptism.
 
Jon_S said:
When you create your own definitions and know all you know about church history from the Acts of the Apostles only,
Click to expand...
My knowledge of church history is not just the Acts of the Apostles, and there are many evangelicals who are familiar with the ends and outs of church history.
Jon_S said:
then people can easily create their easy watered down version that says all that matters is a simple prayer.

Unfortunately, that’s not what Jesus, the Apostles, the Early Church, or frankly even the reformers taught.

It is a cheap form of Christianity catered and evolved around the American Dream.
Click to expand...
Myself, several evangelical posters on this thread, and many evangelicals around the world (I’d argue the majority) do not reduce salvation to “a simple prayer” or the American Dream.

Believing in believer’s baptism has nothing to do with believing in cheap grace or an ignorance of church history. That is just being pejorative.
 
Adamski said:
A catholic cant change the reality of theology and morals as individual Protestant ministers can
Click to expand...
Neither can Protestant ministers. Reality is reality. :confused:

However, ministers of any religion can be corrupt or morally despicable or concerned with compromising the truth for financial reasons. That is not something that is not something that is exclusive to evangelical churches.
 
PRmerger said:
Well, there are some Calvinist evangelicals who believe exactly this. God has predestined some souls to go to hell. It is part of His Sovereign Will. That could be infants, right?
Click to expand...
Uhm. I’m an Arminian.

I will tell you this frankly. While Calvinists feel differently about this, when I look at Calvinist theology I can see nothing but a monstrosity. I could never worship a God that is portrayed by Calvinist theology. That’s just me.
 
ltwin said:
Believing in believer’s baptism has nothing to do with believing in cheap grace or an ignorance of church history. That is just being pejorative.
Click to expand...
It certainly betrays a profound ignorance of church history.
 
ltwin said:
Uhm. I’m an Arminian.
Click to expand...
Ok.
I will tell you this frankly. While Calvinists feel differently about this, when I look at Calvinist theology I can see nothing but a monstrosity. I could never worship a God that is portrayed by Calvinist theology
Click to expand...
Yep. Just saying that your comment here “No evangelical that I know of teaches that infant children go to hell. Someone who believed that would quite frankly believe in a God that was a monster” is proven wrong by the fact that there are evangelical Calvinists.
 
Nicea325 said:
Then why bother at all?
Click to expand...
It’s a commandment of Jesus. It’s part of becoming a disciple. It’s burying the old man. It’s identifying with the death, burial, and resurrection with Christ. Etc.
Nicea325 said:
So it is an either/or condition?

One is capable of believing and being baptized (YOUR SAFE…says the Umpire)

or…

One is not capable of believing therefore baptism is denied. (YOUR OUT…hit the showers!)

Sorry,but how sad. 😦
Click to expand...
It’s not about being safe. It’s about the nature and purpose of baptism. Since baptism is an act of faith, a calling out to God, an appeal toward a good conscience, it serves no purpose for those who have not expressed an act of faith.
 
PRmerger said:
Ok.

Yep. Just saying that your comment here “No evangelical that I know of teaches that infant children go to hell. Someone who believed that would quite frankly believe in a God that was a monster” is proven wrong by the fact that there are evangelical Calvinists.
Click to expand...
Then I stand corrected. However, that is not a position that I respect or understand.
 
ltwin said:
My knowledge of church history is not just the Acts of the Apostles, and there are many evangelicals who are familiar with the ends and outs of church history.
Click to expand...
So why do you not practice the same faith as Polycarp (disciple of the Apostle John) or Clement ( a disciple of Peter) or Ignatius (a disciple of Apostle John) or Irenaeus (student of Polycarp).

You realize by discounting these people is like me saying George Washington knew nothing about the Declaration of Independence; that I know better than he did and all I need is the Declaration of Independence to know everything about the american revolution.

Surely you see this is silly, but it is exactly what you do when you discount the Early Church Fathers and trade their views for your own.
Myself, several evangelical posters on this thread, and many evangelicals around the world (I’d argue the majority) do not reduce salvation to “a simple prayer” or the American Dream.
Click to expand...
Believing in believer’s baptism has nothing to do with believing in cheap grace or an ignorance of church history. That is just being pejorative.
Click to expand...
If you do not reduce salvation to the sinners prayer then, how is one saved? What else is involved. Greg Laurie (harvest crusade) and Billy Graham would disagree with you, among many others. (Not that they are right).

I would also say you would be hard pressed to say American Culture has not highly influenced your theology, especially since these movements are founded in the American Enlightenment.
 
Jon_S said:
So why do you not practice the same faith as Polycarp (disciple of the Apostle John) or Clement ( a disciple of Peter) or Ignatius (a disciple of Apostle John) or Irenaeus (student of Polycarp).

You realize by discounting these people is like me saying George Washington knew nothing about the Declaration of Independence; that I know better than he did and all I need is the Declaration of Independence to know everything about the american revolution.

Surely you see this is silly, but it is exactly what you do when you discount the Early Church Fathers and trade their views for your own.
Click to expand...
That’s not it at all. It’s more a recognition that a lot can happen and change in one or two generations.
Jon_S said:
If you do not reduce salvation to the sinners prayer then, how is one saved? What else is involved.
Click to expand...
Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ. With faith there must be repentance, which is a complete turning away from sin. This is not a one time thing or event but a life of repentance. This is justification, the imputation of Christ’s righteousness.

As we continue in faith and repentance, yielding to the Holy Spirit and making use of the means of grace He has provided for us (the Scriptures, prayer, church fellowship, sacraments/ordinances) we experience the lifelong process of sanctification, which is the infused righteousness of Christ.

If faith and repentance cease, then salvation is lost.
Jon_S said:
Greg Laurie (harvest crusade) and Billy Graham would disagree with you, among many others. (Not that they are right).
Click to expand...
I can’t speak for Billy Graham. I would be surprised if he thought all you had to do was pray a prayer and then you’d be saved. I think his soteriology would be more nuanced then that. I could be wrong though.

But I do know that Greg Laurie does not believe all you have to do be be saved is pray a prayer. He has spoken on the need to confess Jesus as lord, obey his commands, resist the devil by fleeing temptation and avoiding besetting sin, and work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
Jon_S said:
I would also say you would be hard pressed to say American Culture has not highly influenced your theology, especially since these movements are founded in the American Enlightenment.
Click to expand...
Much of evangelicalism has been a reaction against enlightenment thinking.
 
manualman said:
You do have to forgive us poor catholics for never being quite sure what any particular protestant’s beliefs are going to be since they are so varied. The above raised my eyebrows since my own experience in evangelical circles included a definate recognition of Original Sin and the universality of man’s fallen condition. In their theology ALL had sinned (usually citing Rom 3:23), the wages of sin were death (Rom 6:23) and forgiveness could only come from being saved by accepting Christ (John 3:16). See, I learned SOMETHING…

But their theology was rigid in this regard in how it applied to those who died without ever having had heard the gospel. While this had the salutory effect of really motivating their missionary efforts, it (IMO) did God’s character rather a disservice…

My point is that catholics do tend to make the mistake of assuming that their own encounters with evangelical protestantism are reflective of the entirety of evangelicaldom. Your post suggests that maybe ya’ll can make the same mistake. There are lots of different opinions on things out there in the protestant world and anybody literate and who owns a bible can stake a claim to knowing the truth as much as the next guy. The average catholic in the pew holds lots of weird opinions too, but at least we have somewhere to go to sift the truth from the nuttiness. When people want to know what protestantism believes, the sky’s the limit. There’s no one stop shop to find out. It’s great to say that you just need the bible and the Holy Spirit until you realize how many people have both and yet profoundly disagree.

So just as it may be wrong for a catholic convert from an evangelical community to generalize his experience broadly about evangelicalism, it’s just as wrong for you to claim speakership for the entire movement. His experience in it is as valid as yours.
Click to expand...
LOL, Manualman, I wasn’t claiming speakership. I hesitated for a moment when I wrote what you quoted from, wondering how to say what I was thinking so it would be clear I wasn’t claiming to speakership. I settled on “I think…” to modify and soften “…Evangelicals believe…” because it is what I think. I continue to think that, with the possible exception of some fringe groups, and possibly some very hardcore Calvinists, Evangelicals believe those who die in infancy go to heaven. I may be wrong. Whenever I write “I think…” or “It seems to me…” I’m automatically acknowledging that I may be wrong. Did the church you spoke actually say they believed deceased infants go to hell? What denomination was it?

Here, from Dr. Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Seminary, are a couple of articles explaining how Evangelicals can believe in original sin but also believe infants go to heaven. He quotes some Calvinists, too, who believed the same.

Dr. Mohler is, of course, Baptist himself (some things he says may raise hackles). I’m not Baptist, but I believe he does a good job of thoughtfully explaining how Evangelicals think about the question of infants and the mentally incapacitated.

Manualman, you said, “His experience in it is just as valid as yours.” Who do you mean by “his”? I don’t think I’ve attempted to invalidate anyone’s experience.

Edit: Forgot the link: essentialchristianity.com/pages.asp?pageid=31701
 
ltwin said:
Neither can Protestant ministers. Reality is reality. :confused:

However, ministers of any religion can be corrupt or morally despicable or concerned with compromising the truth for financial reasons. That is not something that is not something that is exclusive to evangelical churches.
Click to expand...
I would think long and hard about that statement and then go
Read some history books
  1. First christain divorce
  2. First Christians exceptence of birth control
200 years ago southern Baptist justified salvery because of sin color

In the 7 years at one protestant church the theology changed on the pastors whim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top