John the Baptist

[awfulthings9]

This sort of belongs here and sort of in the Apologetics forum, but I’m hoping to get some insight. In a discussion with another in these forums, the subject of (according to the gospel of Luke) John the Baptist’s being sanctified in his mother’s womb came up. I had never really thought about this as deeply as I did then, and some questions came up which I hope some of you might have encountered before or could shed light on.

1. We take the fact that he was “filled with the holy Spirit” or being sanctified as meaning that he was born without original sin, though not conceived this way. Does this mean that he never actually committed a conscious sin? Or is this not a church teaching that he lived a sin-free life? Do Protestants understand it the same way generally?
2. Has anyone ever had any luck using this event as an argument for infant baptism, since it demonstrates that sanctification can occur before someone reaches the age of reason, such as we claim occurs, even though an infant cannot “repent”? Any pitfalls with this theory?
3. Has anyone ever had any luck using this event as an argument for Mary’s Immaculate Conception since it demonstrates that he who was chosen to lead the way for the Lord was made pure, so by extension, she who was chosen to BE the way for the Lord would be made pure, too (and more so, since Mary was preserved from conception from original sin)? Any pitfalls with this theory?

Thanks for your help and Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[mercygate]

awfulthings9:

1. Has anyone ever had any luck using this event as an argument for infant baptism, since it demonstrates that sanctification can occur before someone reaches the age of reason, such as we claim occurs, even though an infant cannot “repent”? Any pitfalls with this theory?

Thanks for your help and Happy Thanksgiving!

Hey awful! The only person I have ever known to use your #2 as a support for infant baptism, based on your argument here, is moi.

Now, since I think this is such a neat idea, and I do not see any pitfalls, since the Gospel states that the babe “leapt for joy” – meaning there was a faith response of “joy” even before the babe was capable of reason – it cannot possibly be that I was the first to think this up. Anybody who can direct me to earlier sources for this brilliant insight ( ) will get a big cyberhug. (Great minds, awful . . . Great minds .)

Happy Thanksgiving to you also.