Infallibility of Church?

[MT1926]

I don’t think this contradicts what I said if you consider both water and fire as symbols.

I must have misunderstood. When you said but who among us has been baptized with fire I thought you meant no one has yet to receive Jesus Baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire spoken of in Matthew 3:11. Didn’t know you meant because it is just a symbol.

In other words, the water is an analogy that refers to the cleansing power of the Spirit.

Sure but that kind of leaves me with more questions…Why does Jesus say water and Spirit and not Spirit through water? Which would fit your analogy much better. Also, if fire and water are symbolic of something else in these 2 passages why don’t we consider the Spirit to be symbolic of something else?

So both Baptists and Catholics maintain that there is a point (the age of accountability or reason) at which one must confirm his/her own personal faith.

OK I think I understand where you were going with this. The confusing part was the word “believers” Baptism. I think I understand if you were comparing the confessions of faith.

Although Augustine also taught this idea of infant Limbo, as well as many other Church Fathers, it is not official Church doctrine.

However, keep in mind the only reason this Augustine started this debate in the first place was because Pelagius asserted that man is capable of living a perfect moral life by virtue of his natural reason and will alone and is not wounded by original sin. He was denying the need for Baptism to wash away original sin.

But I think it goes to show that the whole question of infants and others who have not been baptized (due either to lack of understanding of opportunity) is one of those areas for which we must be charitable.

I do agree that we must be charitable. However, keep in mind that if the Church did not teach the necessity of infant Baptism, to wash away original sin, from the very beginning, then this debate would have never occurred and Pelagius’ heresy might be the prevailing doctrine we all believe in.

I think this is much deeper than we are able to hash through on a public forum.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Yes, Jesus commissioned the Apostles to baptize “ in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” This is not the same thing as baptizing with the Holy Spirit . We do not send the Holy Spirit.

Once again not sure why you guys keep thinking I believe the person doing the Baptizing send the Holy Spirit. How many times do I have to say the contrary before you guys will finally accept what I say?

Totally agree 100%…We do not send the Holy Spirit.

Totally agree 100%…The Father and Son send the Holy Spirit.

I think where we disagree is…

I believe the Holy Spirit is sent when we are born of water and spirit in Baptism (John 3)

I also believe, the Father and Son send the Holy Spirit when the Apostles/Priest/Pastors etc… Baptize“ in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

That’s it plain and simple. Even posted the link to the Catechism above. Honestly cannot fathom why someone would come to the conclusion that I believe someone else is sending the Holy Spirit.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Correct, you did not bring up the Church. But you brought up the fact that Christ handed authority over to the Apostles. I was merely commenting on the fact (according to Protestants) that the authority Christ bequeathed to the Apostles was not in turn bequeathed to the entire Church.

We are discussing Baptism here? If you believe the Church received no authority from the Apostles. Do you believe no one has authority to Baptize and all Baptisms should have stopped after the death of the last Apostle?

God Bless

 

[Glenn]

Honestly cannot fathom why someone would come to the conclusion that I believe someone else is sending the Holy Spirit.

I quoted John the Baptist who said that he baptizes with water but there is one coming [Christ] who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. You responded that Christ passed his authority on to the Apostles, which seemed to imply that they also baptize with the Holy Spirit. Thus, I referred to our shared understanding of the Father and Son sending the Holy Spirit as an indication that indeed the apostles did NOT baptize with the Holy Spirit.

If you want a definition of being born again, I think this is it: to be baptized with the Holy Spirit. And it is Christ and Christ alone who does this. Water baptism is an external sign of what Christ has done internally.

I think where we disagree is…

I believe the Holy Spirit is sent when we are born of water and spirit in Baptism (John 3)

Yes, this is where we disagree. The Holy Spirit, in my understanding, is sent solely at the initiative and discretion of the Father and the Son. The apostles baptize in the name of the Trinity, but the Spirit is not at their beckon call. They cannot see another man’s heart. The Spirit may be sent before, during, or after water baptism, or not at all. In the sacrament of confession, only God knows if one has truly repented. It is the same in baptism. Only God sees the heart. We are simply obeying the command of Christ to place a visible sign of communion upon those who profess to believe.

And even in regard to infants, I think we can safely say that God knows their hearts. He knows not only who we are but also who we will ultimately become. Since he is omniscient, he knows who will and who will not be born again.

 

[Glenn]

We are discussing Baptism here? If you believe the Church received no authority from the Apostles. Do you believe no one has authority to Baptize and all Baptisms should have stopped after the death of the last Apostle?

Yes, the Church has the authority to baptize, and that authority was given by Christ himself in the Great Commission. But the Church’s authority is not the same as Christ’s authority. Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit. The authority of the Church is the authority to testify to what Christ has done.

 

[MT1926]

C

The article cited more examples of the Spirit working in and thru man in OT.

Maybe you could link the article

Who says it is one event? It is a linguistic choice as to how to see this “and”.

Feel free to present me with an example of a double event tying two words together with only the word and.

Why do you disallow Jesus now to add a fourth descriptor of the same event?

The scriptures tie water and Baptism together so many times I’ve lost count. Feel free to point me to any other verse of scripture where John uses water to mean birth.

Let’s look at your example again.

Jesus then said, “what is born of the flesh is flesh”

What is born of women (water) is flesh, what is born of God is spirit.

You believe here when Jesus said flesh he meant woman(water) and not living “in the flesh” our fleshly natures basically what we inherited with original sin.

When Jesus says in Mark that the flesh is weak is He talking about woman(water) there? Or how about when St. Paul talks about the flesh all throughout Romans is this also woman(water)?

As I said, I understand other rationales on the “water”. It can be both and and not either or

How can you understand this verse as a “both/and” and still hold the position you hold? Your position can not stand if Jesus means water and spirit as one event.

Just that the other part, born of the spirit, doesn’t fit.

It fits nicely if you don’t force it into being two separate events.

We all admit the baptisms at the time were preparatory, not regenerational.

Nope we ALL don’t admit this.

Are you saying born again was a future operation, after Pentecost?

Nope saying it wasn’t in the OT because Jesus didn’t institute the Sacrament until after He taught us about it in John 3.

If so, doesn’t answer the question as to why Nicodemus didn’t believe and others did , at the time of discourse.(I have said he didn’t believe cause he wasn’t born again, others were).

Which I already pointed out you haven’t provided any evidence for OT regenerated people also being born again. You already stated…

Lol…so the saints could enter into heaven permanently before Jesus, that Jesus would not be the firstfruits from the grave?

Well if they were already born again why didn’t they enter before Jesus?

God Bless

 

[mcq72]

Well I don’t know where to go with this because you still haven’t given me a definition of being born again. Which was what my question was asking.

Sorry , I thought post 571 covered it. No bells or whistles. It is a spiritual rebirth of ones spirit, that part of us that communes with God, on his level, that is spiritual. It (man’s spirit) needs rebirth because of original sin, or dead in trespasses in sin. It began at the fall of man at the garden, the fall and reconciliation (rebirth), the emnity between God and man dissolved, in peace by grace, and by the shedding of blood, and by faith(in the promise of her seed).

It happens to a man when he responds, his will even being grace to do so , to the promptings of sin, judgement and righteousness (in His promises) by the ministering of the Holy Ghost. This responding is sometimes referred to as “calling out to God” for such salvation. It is then followed by some rite or initiation into whatever is apt for the covenant at hand, at least since Abraham.

“Born again is a phrase used by many Protestants to describe the phenomenon of gaining faith in Jesus Christ. It is an experience when everything they have been taught as Christians becomes real, and they develop a direct and personal relationship with God.”…a Wiki definition

Did not find a catechism answer to catholic definition, but that it is similar to above wiki , except for catholic posts saying that it happens at baptism.

How can one believe and gladly profess Christ and renounce Satan without a revived born again spirit ? No one is baptized and then comes to believe and renounce etc.

Catholics must be saying man is not totally depraved, that by grace he is somehow good enough, in the flesh, to believe, or that the spirit of man is not dead, that it is partly alive and not totally at emnity with God before baptism.

 

[MT1926]

Thus, I referred to our shared understanding of the Father and Son sending the Holy Spirit as an indication that indeed the apostles did NOT baptize with the Holy Spirit.

That’s good, but do you at least agree the it is at the moment the Apostles, or even us, pours the water or emerges the person, and says the words Father, Son & Spirit that the Holy Spirit comes?

If you want a definition of being born again, I think this is it: to be baptized with the Holy Spirit.

Just to be clear you mean water Baptized in the name of the…

Correct?

And it is Christ and Christ alone who does this.

I do agree that nothing happens without Christ I’m just not sure I fully accept the alone part. He can and does do it alone however I think He chooses to use us as His instruments. After all what are we doing here in the first place if He wanted to do it alone. Personally, I have no problem with Christ giving the Apostles authority, it takes absolutely nothing away from Christ. If anything it adds to Christ. Shows how loving He really is, desiring to use us in His plan of salvation.

The apostles baptize in the name of the Trinity, but the Spirit is not at their beckon call.

That seems like a really weird Way of thinking about it? If you say to your child if we finish raking all of the leaves we will go for ice cream, does that place you at the child’s beckon call? Did you as the father relinquish any power to the child?

John tells us…If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

Doesn’t that put God at our beckon call every time we confess?

They cannot see another man’s heart.

I think this might be another major difference. Sure salvation is contingent on the state of our heart but I don’t see why being born again would be. We are all dead in sin prior to being born again. Our heart can’t be right without sanctifying grace and we don’t get sanctifying grace until we are born again. If it’s based on the state of our hearts there is no way of being born again.

I know it’s all about grace do you have a teaching on how we get grace to set out hearts right so we can receive the Holy Spirit who is the one who brings us the grace?

Just my thoughts, having a hard time seeing how it works.

God Bless

 

[mcq72]

Well if they were already born again why didn’t they enter before Jesus?

Gates of heaven were still closed.You know that. You also know the prophecy that He would be firstfruits, of such entry.

Which I already pointed out you haven’t provided any evidence for OT regenerated people also being born again. You already stated…

no, they are one in the same, regeneration and born again. The only thing that is different is the ministry of the Holy Spirit thereafter.

Nope saying it wasn’t in the OT because Jesus didn’t institute the Sacrament until after He taught us about it in John 3.

So people were not born of God, born of the spirit, before John 3 ? David and Enoch and Elijah and Abraham were only born of the flesh ?

Feel free to present me with an example of a double event tying two words together with only the word and.

well to qualify for Social security benefits I must both be 62 and payed into the system if not disabled, or 62 and a US citizen. I became a citizen 62 years ago, and became 62 last month, two events …etc.

The scriptures tie water and Baptism together so many times I’ve lost count. Feel free to point me to any other verse of scripture where John uses water to mean birth.

Let’s look at your example again.

well born again is used what twice, and once is enough. And if i recall only once in the bible does a man speak of reentering His mothers womb.

As to other verses dealing with baptism, yep plenty of em, even tying in with regeneration of sorts, just not the nicodemus one.

Again, don’t deny a role for baptism, but for the life of me, one is already professing faith in Christ where they once cursed Him and they go into waters they once laughed at. And you say they have not become graced into a new creature because they have not been baptized yet ? Really ? Miracle of miracles!

You believe here when Jesus said flesh he meant woman(water) and not living “in the flesh” our fleshly natures basically what we inherited with original sin.

Both, they be the same…I mean it is in the conversation.

 

[Glenn]

I think this might be another major difference. Sure salvation is contingent on the state of our heart but I don’t see why being born again would be. We are all dead in sin prior to being born again. Our heart can’t be right without sanctifying grace and we don’t get sanctifying grace until we are born again. If it’s based on the state of our hearts there is no way of being born again.

I know it’s all about grace do you have a teaching on how we get grace to set out hearts right so we can receive the Holy Spirit who is the one who brings us the grace?

We must exercise faith to be born again. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).

But how do we believe? How do we have faith? That is by God’s prevenient grace. Because we are “dead in our trespasses and sins,” God must make us alive.

“God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:4-9).

So we must believe the gospel. But in order to believe, God must actually change us from men who are spiritually dead into men who are spiritually alive. It is the grace of God from the very beginning. As it says in Ephesians, even our faith is not our own doing. It is the gift of God.

So we are born again when we exercise faith. But the reason we exercise faith is because of God’s grace.

 

[MT1926]

Born again is a phrase used by many Protestants to describe the phenomenon of gaining faith in Jesus Christ. It is an experience when everything they have been taught as Christians becomes real, and they develop a direct and personal relationship with God.”…a Wiki definition

Ok that’s not really how Catholics define born again but it helps to understand where you are coming from, thanks.

Did not find a catechism answer to catholic definition, but that it is similar to above wiki , except for catholic posts saying that it happens at baptism.

I posted a link to the Catechism up above if you are interested.

How can one believe and gladly profess Christ and renounce Satan without a revived born again spirit ?

Agree they can’t. I think our differences is I believe being born again is what gives you the grace to be able to do these things, basically why we baptize babies, where as you are saying you need to do these things first, responding with your profession of faith or conversion experience, and after that occurs you will be born again.

No one is baptized and then comes to believe and renounce etc.

Disagree with the no one. Can’t help myself you no I don’t like absolutes. Baptism give us the grace we need to believe and renounce.

that by grace he is somehow good enough

This is a really confusing statement. We believe grace is a free gift from God, we believe we are saved by grace and that all graces flow through Christ. Do you believe even with grace we aren’t good enough? What’s the sense of giving us grace if it doesn’t do anything?

that the spirit of man is not dead, that it is partly alive and not totally at emnity with God before baptism.

This one confuses me to. You’re the one saying OT people were already born again and that babies are automatically saved even though not born again. Wouldn’t both of these claims line up with what you say here?

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Gates of heaven were still closed.You know that. You also know the prophecy that He would be firstfruits, of such entry.

Yes the gates were closed but from my understanding what kept them out wasn’t gates it was they lacked the grace nescesary to remove original sin. The grace that flows from a Christ. The grace that is necessary to remove the stain of original sin and make us born again believers. Which is why I asked if they already had the necessary grace and were born again then what was keeping them from entering. Not being smart here just want to know your teaching on what kept them out?

no, they are one in the same, regeneration and born again. The only thing that is different is the ministry of the Holy Spirit thereafter.

So you don’t teach you receive the Holy Spirit when you are born again? How is one regenerated without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?

So people were not born of God, born of the spirit, before John 3 ? David and Enoch and Elijah and Abraham were only born of the flesh ?

From my point of view yes. They were righteous but not regenerated born again because Jesus had yet to send them the Holy Spirit. I’m just not understanding how they can be born of water and spirit with no spirit being sent until after the resurrection?

I must both be 62 and payed into the system

Not seeing how this is an example.

62 and a US citizen.

And what sentence would you use around these words that makes any sense?

I became a citizen 62 years ago, and became 62 last month, two events …etc.

You actually prove my point with this one. Look you had to use the word became after the and, which was my point. Born of water and THEN the spirit.

one is already professing faith in Christ where they once cursed Him

This is fine, but “for the life of me” I’m not seeing why this has to occur before one can be born again. Is it not possible for someone to grow up never cursing God?

And you say they have not become graced into a new creature because they have not been baptized yet ? Really ? Miracle of miracles!

Honestly why do you believe this any more a miracle of miracles than the guy who just claims to be born again, cause he says he is?

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

@mcq72, @Glenn, @Wannano

Hey guys I was just saying my prayers and felt inclined to make sure you guys know…

17 Iron sharpens iron,
and one man sharpens another.

We might not always agree and we might even get pretty heated at times, however I want you guys to know I don’t take your words as coming from an enemy but a friend.

Your iron (your love of our Lord) definitely sharpens my Love of the Lord.

Thank you for these dialogues. We might not always agree but you have sharpened my faith as I continue to walk with our Lord.

For the time you guys put into dialogue on this forum I will be forever grateful.

Thank you

And as always

God Bless

 

[mcq72]

This is fine, but “for the life of me” I’m not seeing why this has to occur before one can be born again. Is it not possible for someone to grow up never cursing God?

Again, I would say the exception makes the rule. Most people by themselves do not grow up at peace with God.

Paul and other scriptures testify to the condition of man separated from God, and that all of us are or were at one time.

Scripture also tells us what can blur these lines of perceived sufficiency or insufficiency in ourselves, that being religion. Jesus himself said the drunkards and hookers receive the gospel easier than the religious.

Religion can make one feel good and that they are not in need of a physician.

Religion allow some “to make a fair show” , but “in the flesh”, and avoid suffering persecution for yielding to truth and Spirit. Gal.6:13

So, while one may not curse God, or persecute God as Saul did, they may be indifferent to Him, which is worse, and certainly are not one with Him, before new birth.

You actually prove my point with this one. Look you had to use the word became after the and, which was my point. Born of water and THEN the spirit.

Nope, “and” can definitely conjoin two distinct events.

I must be 63 years old and have contributed to SS to collect.

I’m just not understanding how they can be born of water and spirit with no spirit being sent until after the resurrection?

Reheneration, born again, born of God, born of the spirit, is what happens to our spirit, irrelevant to the different dispensations of The Spirit. That God does it is a given. That it happens to us is the command, to be born again.

The Holy Spirit was not invented at Pentecost. Jesus was not invented on Christmas day. And the Father was certainly active in the OT as well.

OT folk can be born again without without permanent indwelling of the Spirit, or Holy Ghost baptism in my opinion. For sure the Holy Ghost is present, and leads one to first repentance, then to faith and Godly living and works.

Another words new birth, the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost are three separate events . At least they were for the apostles and believers between the two testaments.

Apparently one in the OT could have the Holy Spirit with them, and could have the Spirit come upon them, and do a work within them, even making them regenerated, born of God, born of the Spirit.

OT saints were not just born in the flesh, but born of the Spirit, a work of grace, even of faith, apprehending the hope in the coming One.

 

[Wannano]

@mcq72, @Glenn, @Wannano

Hey guys I was just saying my prayers and felt inclined to make sure you guys know…

17 Iron sharpens iron,
and one man sharpens another.

We might not always agree and we might even get pretty heated at times, however I want you guys to know I don’t take your words as coming from an enemy but a friend.

Your iron (your love of our Lord) definitely sharpens my Love of the Lord.

Thank you for these dialogues. We might not always agree but you have sharpened my faith as I continue to walk with our Lord.

For the time you guys put into dialogue on this forum I will be forever grateful.

Thank you

And as always

God Bless

I am thankful to be included in the trio you addressed for I readily admit I am the weakest. Your statement here this morning confirms to me what I have felt before about you and that is that you feel the nudge of the Holy Spirit who gives us love. Without that love, none of us are anything. Thanks!

 

[mcq72]

McQ72:

So people were not born of God, born of the spirit, before John 3 ? David and Enoch and Elijah and Abraham were only born of the flesh ?

Can u show me where it is written that flesh can be righteous, or where we by nature (flesh) can be spiritually righteous ?

 

[Glenn]

Hey guys I was just saying my prayers and felt inclined to make sure you guys know…

17 Iron sharpens iron,
and one man sharpens another.

We might not always agree and we might even get pretty heated at times, however I want you guys to know I don’t take your words as coming from an enemy but a friend.

Your iron (your love of our Lord) definitely sharpens my Love of the Lord.

Thank you for these dialogues. We might not always agree but you have sharpened my faith as I continue to walk with our Lord.

For the time you guys put into dialogue on this forum I will be forever grateful.

Thank you

And as always

God Bless

May you, and each of us, have the peace of Christ.

 

[mcq72]

So you don’t teach you receive the Holy Spirit when you are born again? How is one regenerated without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?

Today, yes when you become born again the Holy Spirit then indwells you. He also baptizes you, and gives power and gifts. I believe the Holy Spirit first regenerates from without, then He comes in.

The apostles I believe were born again when they came to believe in the Messiah, as evidenced by Peter’s famous confession, at the “rock” discourse. (Not sure if and when and by whom they were water baptized). Jesus told them the Holy Spirit was with them, was giving them understanding, even from the Father.

Jesus also said the Spirit would soon be in them. I believe this happened after the resurrection, when Jesus breathed on them and said, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost”.

Finally they were baptized in the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, receiving power and boldness in the preaching of the Word.(…tarry ye in Jerusalem, till ye be empowered from on high).

 

[thistle]

Today, yes when you become born again the Holy Spirit then indwells you. He also baptizes you, and gives power and gifts. I believe the Holy Spirit first regenerates from without, then He comes in.

The apostles I believe were born again when they came to believe in the Messiah, as evidenced by Peter’s famous confession, at the “rock” discourse. (Not sure if and when and by whom they were water baptized). Jesus told them the Holy Spirit was with them, was giving them understanding, even from the Father.

Jesus also said the Spirit would soon be in them. I believe this happened after the resurrection, when Jesus breathed on them and said, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost”.

Finally they were baptized in the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, receiving power and boldness in the preaching of the Word.(…tarry ye in Jerusalem, till ye be empowered from on high).

You receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism.

You are baptised in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. That does not mean you are baptised in the name of the Father and Son and then later the Holy Spirit.

Born again means Baptism as a Christian!

 

[mcq72]

Unless you were Cornelius of course.

But yes, thank you . 3000 did as you say however, but some with the laying on of hands also.

And agree, Christians, disciples of Jesus, have been baptized.

As to your Trinitarian quip, I am actually saying one has the Holy Spirit indwelling before baptism, for no one call calls Jesus as Lord and Savior genuinely ( even as professed before baptism) except by the Holy Ghost. No one is baptized without such a declaration first.( obviously for"adult" participants).