I've hit a BIG Baptism stumbling block with a Baptist

[Zooey]

Not lost to begin with? Have you ever heard of Original Sin? How about verses where God shows his mercy by only holding men’s children responsible for the sins of their fathers to the seventh generation?

You seem to really like to selectively quote the Bible. There are instances also of men converting, and having their entire households baptized, including slaves.

If the baby was not lost to begin with, what do we need Jesus for? At what point do we become lost? Age 15?

Salvation is a gift from God, not a choice. We can choose to accept it, but we don’t choose to be saved. We choose to accept a gift called grace.

Your reasoning is leading you into dangerous heresy.

Exactly right!

 

[jfreak64]

I like the scripture that you used: Matthew28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But my question or point of contention is this, How can you teach an infant? How can you even expect a 4 year old that has not been raised around parents to understand the most basic tenets of salvation? This child has not been baptized or accepted Christ. Ezekiel 18:20 - The child does not bear the iniquity of the father, but the wickedness of the wicked is upon himself. The only person held accountable for Adam’s sin is Adam, not his descendants. Deuteronomy 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. I knoew that it seems that I have " selected" scriptures; however, I am just using the resources that I have available.

 

[mercygate]

I like the scripture that you used: Matthew28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But my question or point of contention is this, How can you teach an infant? How can you even expect a 4 year old that has not been raised around parents to understand the most basic tenets of salvation? This child has not been baptized or accepted Christ. Ezekiel 18:20 - The child does not bear the iniquity of the father, but the wickedness of the wicked is upon himself. The only person held accountable for Adam’s sin is Adam, not his descendants. Deuteronomy 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. I knoew that it seems that I have " selected" scriptures; however, I am just using the resources that I have available.

Are you a member of a Confession that rejects the doctrine of Original Sin?

 

[jfreak64]

I am a member of the church. I do not understand your question. I believe that adam and eve fell in the garden. Scripture confirms that. I believe that a sinful nature is past down to everyone, because we are all descendents of Adam(Romans5:18). But yet GOD has no pleasure in the death of the wicked; yet it commands all people to repent, to believe on JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins, to be taught the Word of GOD and to be baptized. I just do not see the validity of baptizing someone when they are unaware and accountable of their actions and their need for a savior.

 

[Church_Militant]

I am a member of the church. I do not understand your question. I believe that adam and eve fell in the garden. Scripture confirms that. I believe that a sinful nature is past down to everyone, because we are all descendents of Adam(Romans5:18). But yet GOD has no pleasure in the death of the wicked; yet it commands all people to repent, to believe on JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins, to be taught the Word of GOD and to be baptized. I just do not see the validity of baptizing someone when they are unaware and accountable of their actions and their need for a savior.

Yet, baptism is compared to circumcision in the New Testament and that circumcision was administered to infants by the command of God. Who made their profession of faith? Their parents.

One of the very earliest verifiable Christian writings is the Martyrdom of Polycarp and I strong suggest that you read it carefully, especially chapter 9:3 which says"But when the magistrate pressed him hard and said, ‘Swear the oath, and I will release thee; revile the Christ,’ Polycarp said, ‘Fourscore and six years have I been His servant, and He hath done me no wrong. How then can I blaspheme my King who saved me?’" One of the things that you’ll find is that they are talking about his advanced age. He straight off tells the magistrate that he’s been a believer for 86 years, and he’s 86 at the time. That means he was infant baptized and since he was a disciple of St. John the Evangelist, means that he was very probably baptized by that apostle as an infant.

 

[jfreak64]

But having been called by GOD does not mean he was baptized. Look at Jeremiah: Jeremiah 1 :4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. I guess the question we need to re-ask ourselves is this, What is the purpose of baptism? I will let you answer and then I will respond.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi Elzee, I should have been more straight forward. The Bible does make a distinction of being filled or empowered by the Holy Spirit vs being regenerated, indwelt with the Holy Spirit. To find the texts about being filled simply use a concordance to find “Spirit” with the words ( as seperate searches ) “upon”, “fill”, “full”, “power”, these will yeild the texts about being empowered with the Holy Spirit, which is the case in Acts 10. Simply, use a concordance to look up the word “spirit” to locate the texts about being indwelt with the Spirit. Basically, those in Acts 10 were filled with the Holy Spirit, but were NOT indwelt with the Holy Spirit. Being indwelt with the Holy Spirit relates to regeneration. So, your baptist friend in short has being empowered by the Holy Spirit confused with regeneration.

 

[mercygate]

Hi Elzee, I should have been more straight forward. The Bible does make a distinction of being filled or empowered by the Holy Spirit vs being regenerated, indwelt with the Holy Spirit. To find the texts about being filled simply use a concordance to find “Spirit” with the words ( as seperate searches ) “upon”, “fill”, “full”, “power”, these will yeild the texts about being empowered with the Holy Spirit, which is the case in Acts 10. Simply, use a concordance to look up the word “spirit” to locate the texts about being indwelt with the Spirit. Basically, those in Acts 10 were filled with the Holy Spirit, but were NOT indwelt with the Holy Spirit. Being indwelt with the Holy Spirit relates to regeneration. So, your baptist friend in short has being empowered by the Holy Spirit confused with regeneration.

Dan the Man does it again!

 

[jmm08]

I remember asking a similar question last year on this forum, and someone said that in the early Church, the Holy Spirit was poured out on many in an ‘un-normative’ manner to help spread God’s message. I presented this as a possible explanation, but he said there is nothing in Scripture to support that rationalization for this particular passage.

Can anyone help me explain this verse? Thank you!!

I went through RCIA only a few years ago, and before (as a Protestant) I was very much a student of the Bible and attended a variety of Baptist and other protestant denominations.

What you say above coincides with what I’ve always been taught as a Protestant. That the early church had a few situations that were not normative. For example, the centurion Cornelius. Peter had to find out that Gentiles could become Christians too (and not just Jews).

So it is not obvious to me how this is an argument between Catholics and Baptists.

jmm08

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I’m not sure what you’re getting at with your two questions…canyou help me out a little? Sorry!

It is possible for one about to be regenerated ( indwelt with the Holy Spirit ) to be enpowered ( filled ) with the Holy Spirit. For example God used an donkey to speak to a prophet — clearly that animal was not born again. In short, being filled with the Holy Spirit is not the same thing as being born of the Holy Spirit. Those in Acts 10 were enpowered by the Holy Spirit to speak in tongues, that is NOT salvation. It is simply God using these people. So, read Peter as saying, “God is using these people by filling them with the Holy Spirit, lets not keep them from recieving salvation.”

The person you are talking to is equating being filled with the Holy Spirit with tongues as being equal to salvation. Being filled with the Holy Spirit is simply God using that person. What it comes down to, Can God use unbelievers? I would say, if God can use a donkey to speak to a prophet, then Yes God can use unbelievers.

Outline:

One can be filled with the Holy Spirit which allows God to use a person through spiritual gifts. Being filled with the Holy Spirit is NOT salvation.

One can be indwelt with the Holy Spirit ( and not be filled at the same time ) which is regeneration, thus is salvation.

One can be both indwelt and filled with the Holy Spirit at the same time which is Salvation ( indwelt ) along with being used ( filled ) by the Holy Spirit.

The baptist assumption is if one is filled with the Holy Spirit, then they are already born again because they believed on Jesus.

He will base his argument on verse 43 “All the prophets testify about him that **everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness **of sins through his name.”

The text does not say that they in fact did believe in Jesus yet. The Holy Spirit filled the gentiles so that the Jewish beleivers would accept them as believers, Christians too. Your baptist friend is assuming that the gentiles fully believed in Jesus thus they were filled with the Holy Spirit. It is possible that they were not believers yet, only unbelievers being used by the Holy Spirit.

Mark 16 believe and is baptised.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hello Elzee,

Do you not think that Moses, David, Ezekiel and the rest of Old Testament unbaptized biblical writers were not inspired by the Holy Spirit?

Being “inspired” by the Holy Spirit is not equal to being regenerated by the Holy Spirit.

All the Psalms are inspired by the Holy Spirit, but there were times when David was writting while in dispair, which is sin.
Scripture also records the deeds and words of unbelievers like Satan at the temptation — those parts are inspired for us to learn form their mistakes. But, those people and Satan are not born again.

Your idea of studying baptism in the OT sounds interresting.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

There are several New Testament passages which point to specific Old Testament events, and explicitly call them “baptisms”. So even if we try to start with the New Testament to study baptism, it just proceeds to point us back to the Old Testament. The apostle Peter said that Noah’s flood was a type of baptism. The apostle Paul said that the Israelites were actually baptized during the exodus from Egypt. The apostle John and the author of Hebrews each recognized that the ceremonial purifications of the Old Testament were baptisms. The idea of “baptism” was not remotely new to the New Testament church. There had already been many baptisms in Israel’s history and practice, and so we must seek to understand these baptisms first, if we truly wish to understand the significance of baptism in the New Testament.

biblelighthouse.com/sacraments/baptism-ot.htm

The Old Testament’s Hidden Baptisms
mybiblebase.com/modules/mybiblebase/viewstudy_61.html

Here is baptism by sprinkling blood,

Exodus 24:6-8 (New International Version)

6 Moses took half of the blood and put it in bowls, and the other half he sprinkled on the altar. 7 Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it to the people. They responded, “We will do everything the LORD has said; we will obey.”

8 Moses then took the blood, sprinkled it on the people and said, “This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.”

google search baptism old testament.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Keep in mind though that the Old Testament prophets who were indeed filled with the Holy Spirit were NOT washed clean of their sins – specifically original sin. The best they could do was to offer an imperfect sacrifice for their sins. Getting baptized in the name of the Trinity means that our sins are completely washed away and our souls are re-born. The sacrament of Baptism is more than just receiving the Holy Spirit…it also involves being cleansed of original sin and any other sin that may be on the soul. The soul has to be spotless before it can ever enter heaven. We begin at Baptism and continue to keep it clean through the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Your friend will have a hard time with this logic because he doesn’t believe that the soul is actually washed clean at a water baptism. He believes that the soul remains filthy, and is only “covered over”. I think Luther used the analogy of pure white snow covering a pile of dung.

Judaism does not and to my knowledge has ever believed in the doctrine of original sin. It appears that a handful of rabbis have debated the christian doctrine among themselves.

jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=812&letter=S

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Not quite. First of all, accepting Christ is a work in and of itself. Second of all, what about people who have never heard of Christ? What about babies that die very young? Are they doomed? (Of course not, but your theology says they are).

Keep reading your Bible, there’s a lot more about salvation than a couple of verses.

PS - If Christ spent 3 days in Hell, how could the good thief have been with him TODAY in paradise?

Hi sodak, “hell” simply means the grave and based on Luke 16 there were two compartments in the grave, one a place of torment, the other abraham’s bosom or paradise as it is known in ANE literature. So, Jesus was in paradise side of the grave with the thief of the cross.