Protestants: Sinner's Prayer-What must it say and does it assure Salvation?

[Padrej]

Yeah, this is exactly what I was getting at with my original post before FrJohnB stepped in. There seems to be a bit of a communications issue between FrJohnB and I. Perhaps I should quote more particularly when Father is in the thread, I think it will help clear things up.

Padrej, I’m sorry but trying to argue that “immersion” isn’t to be found in the Gosples, because english translators prefer the word “baptize” over translating it “immerse” is ridiculous. The meaning was there from the start, and as a Catholic (note, my faith tradition typically sprinkles) I fully acknowlege that the normative from the start was total immersion in a body of water.

Just becase sprinkling is an OK practice, doesn’t mean that the meaning “immersion” isn’t there. Even when we sprinkle the meaning is there, in a spiritual rather than literal sense.

With all due respect I am not trying to argue that the meaning is not there. The point I am trying to make IF YOU READ carefully was that we make to much ado over the form (immersion-V-pour-V-sprinkle). If you read the post carefully that is what I am saying.

Can you point out any translation in any language that translates that Jesus was immersed instead of baptized and used the word “immersed”? I am not arguing that the meaning is not there in the least bit.

 

[FrJohnB]

You claim the early church taught immersion. They also taught pouring. Please note:

The Didache
(the earliest Christian source of ritual believed to have been the teaching of the apostles)
After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. If you have no living water, then baptize in other water, and if you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Before baptism, let the one baptizing and the one to be baptized fast, as also any others who are able. Command the one who is to be baptized to fast beforehand for one or two days (Didache 7:1 [ca. A.D. 70]).

Hippolytus:
Where there is no scarcity of water the stream shall flow through the baptismal font or pour into it from above; but if water is scarce, whether on a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available. Let them remove their clothing. Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D.215]).

Cyprian:
It behooves those to be baptized . . . so that they are prepared, in the lawful and true and only baptism of the holy Church, by divine regeneration, for the kingdom of God . . . because it is written “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (Epistles 72 [73]: 21 [A.D. 252]).

As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

In the saving sacraments, when necessity compels and when God bestows his pardon, divine benefits are bestowed fully upon believers, nor ought anyone be disturbed because the sick are poured upon or sprinkled when they receive the Lord’s grace" (Letter to a Certain Magnus 69(76):12 [A.D. 254]).

So to say it was not normative from the beginning would be in error.

As to the Israelites walking through/under the water, read the bible carefully; the water separated and the walked on DRY LAND through the midst of the water. Nice try though.

Padrej
Thank you for posting this, particularly from the Didache. I hope this clears the air that the early church also taught pouring as acceptable. I have no idea where we get the idea that you have to argue over immersion being the only right way.

Good point on the Israelites walking on dry land, I have used that to illustrate that the water is only the outward sign because of the fact that they never got wet.

 

[SteveVH]

Yeah, this is exactly what I was getting at with my original post before FrJohnB stepped in. There seems to be a bit of a communications issue between FrJohnB and I. Perhaps I should quote more particularly when Father is in the thread, I think it will help clear things up.

Padrej, I’m sorry but trying to argue that “immersion” isn’t to be found in the Gosples, because english translators prefer the word “baptize” over translating it “immerse” is ridiculous. The meaning was there from the start, and as a Catholic (note, my faith tradition typically sprinkles) I fully acknowlege that the normative from the start was total immersion in a body of water.

Just becase sprinkling is an OK practice, doesn’t mean that the meaning “immersion” isn’t there. Even when we sprinkle the meaning is there, in a spiritual rather than literal sense.

I would agree with just about everything you said. Immersion, from a symbolic standpoint certainly points to death and resurrection in Christ, as well as the washing away of sin and therefore is more meaningful from an appearance standpoint, but no more efficacious sacramentally. All new Catholic Churches are suppose to be built with founts providing the opportunity for immersion. We’ve been immersing adults for about ten years now in my parish but still sprinkle infants. While I would agree with you technically about the word baptism meaning “immersion”, it obviously meant more than that when used in the context of Baptism.

In the middle east, water for immersing is not readily available in all areas and it seems logical to me that sprinkling could very well have been used on their mission to “baptize all nations”. I would say this this would be along the lines of the sacrament of Matrimony. Matrimony literally means the “making of a mother”, but a childless couple is, nonetheless, married. The word has come to mean something more than its technical meaning. “Immersion” could be for the purpose of physically washing while “Baptism” would obviously take on an entirely different meaning.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I’m still following the discussion.

Anna

 

[crazzeto]

With all due respect I am not trying to argue that the meaning is not there. The point I am trying to make IF YOU READ carefully was that we make to much ado over the form (immersion-V-pour-V-sprinkle). If you read the post carefully that is what I am saying.

Can you point out any translation in any language that translates that Jesus was immersed instead of baptized and used the word “immersed”? I am not arguing that the meaning is not there in the least bit.

The perhaps, you should have selected words a little more carefully. You said the meaning can’t be found in the Gosples, but it can be and more over every baptism in the bible, where the form was described involved immersion. The meaning is there, literally to start with, and still spiritually.

 

[crazzeto]

I would agree with just about everything you said. Immersion, from a symbolic standpoint certainly points to death and resurrection in Christ, as well as the washing away of sin and therefore is more meaningful from an appearance standpoint, but no more efficacious sacramentally. All new Catholic Churches are suppose to be built with founts providing the opportunity for immersion. We’ve been immersing adults for about ten years now in my parish but still sprinkle infants. While I would agree with you technically about the word baptism meaning “immersion”, it obviously meant more than that when used in the context of Baptism.

In the middle east, water for immersing is not readily available in all areas and it seems logical to me that sprinkling could very well have been used on their mission to “baptize all nations”. I would say this this would be along the lines of the sacrament of Matrimony. Matrimony literally means the “making of a mother”, but a childless couple is, nonetheless, married. The word has come to mean something more than its technical meaning. “Immersion” could be for the purpose of physically washing while “Baptism” would obviously take on an entirely different meaning.

I certainly never argued that sprinkling constitutes incorrect form, I was responding to a point Padrej made. Or at least, I’m responding to the word he wrote, whether or not those were the intended meaing. He said you can’t get “immersion” out of the Gosples, i.e. the suggestion is that it just isn’t there.

If that’s not what he was trying to say, then I appologize there, that this was the posting I was responding to from the start.

 

[Michael_Vernon]

It’s so easy to get hung-up on forms or wording or trying to decide what GOD will accept, as though HE were an omnipotent bureaucrat. That’s exactly what Jesus told the Pharisees that GOD does not care about. It’s the heart that GOD looks at and judges: is it humble and contrite.

 

[Anna_Scott]

It’s so easy to get hung-up on forms or wording or trying to decide what GOD will accept, as though HE were an omnipotent bureaucrat. That’s exactly what Jesus told the Pharisees that GOD does not care about. It’s the heart that GOD looks at and judges: is it humble and contrite.

Thank you Michael. Very well said. I think you just summed up the thread.

BTW, welcome to CAF!

Anna

 

[SteveVH]

I certainly never argued that sprinkling constitutes incorrect form, I was responding to a point Padrej made. Or at least, I’m responding to the word he wrote, whether or not those were the intended meaing. He said you can’t get “immersion” out of the Gosples, i.e. the suggestion is that it just isn’t there.

If that’s not what he was trying to say, then I appologize there, that this was the posting I was responding to from the start.

No, I didn’t think that you were arguing that sprinkling constitutes incorrect form. Sorry if my comments misled you. I don’t disagree with what you said at all, just giving my take on the situation. I think we’re all on the same page.

God bless crazzeto.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Crazzeto, SteveVH, FrJohnB, Padrej,

Should I set up a beer summit?

Anna

 

[crazzeto]

Crazzeto, SteveVH, FrJohnB, Padrej,

Should I set up a beer summit?

Anna

Well I’m not convinced one needs beers to solve their problems, but that doesn’t mean I won’t take one if you’re buying

 

[Padrej]

Crazzeto, SteveVH, FrJohnB, Padrej,

Should I set up a beer summit?

Anna

Come on Anna you are an Episcopalian, you should know Anglicans and Episcopalians dont discuss things over beer but over scotch. Why do you think they call them “whiskypalians?”
Whenever there are four gathered there is always a fifth.

 

[SteveVH]

Crazzeto, SteveVH, FrJohnB, Padrej,

Should I set up a beer summit?

Anna

I’m in! Maybe it is time to lighten things up a little. Here’s a little history question for you.

Do you know why the Romans finally had to shut down the Colosseum? Because the lions were eating up all the prophets.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Come on Anna you are an Episcopalian, you should know Anglicans and Episcopalians dont discuss things over beer but over scotch. Why do you think they call them “whiskypalians?”
Whenever there are four gathered there is always a fifth.

Padrej,

You are too funny.

I attended an Epsicopal fundraiser dinner last Saturday night. There was a table set up with coffee, water, and punch. I glanced over to the counter (reach-through window from the kitchen). I almost burst out laughing, when I saw a large container of the “monitored” punch, with a sign that said, “Punch with Rum.” I knew I was way out of Baptist territory. I’ve gotta say, the Episcopalians know how to throw a party. Best Church fundraiser I’ve ever attended.

Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

I’m in! Maybe it is time to lighten things up a little. Here’s a little history question for you.

Do you know why the Romans finally had to shut down the Colosseum? Because the lions were eating up all the prophets.

Steve,

Big lol to that.

Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Well I’m not convinced one needs beers to solve their problems, but that doesn’t mean I won’t take one if you’re buying

I didn’t say I was buying. Thought maybe we could take up a “collection.”

Anna

 

[crazzeto]

I didn’t say I was buying. Thought maybe we could take up a “collection.”

Anna

Well I guess shared cost of beer is good enough!

Speaking of beer have you ever tried a Framboise Lambic? If you haven’t, and you’re able to get it in your area I highly recommend it, you’d need to check a store which sells specialty stores. I had my fiance try a Kriek Lambic, and she went from hating all beer, to asking me yesterday when I was planning on buying more

 

[Padrej]

I didn’t say I was buying. Thought maybe we could take up a “collection.”

Anna

Take up a collection? Why not do something religious while we are at it right?

 

[Padrej]

Well I guess shared cost of beer is good enough!

Speaking of beer have you ever tried a Framboise Lambic? If you haven’t, and you’re able to get it in your area I highly recommend it, you’d need to check a store which sells specialty stores. I had my fiance try a Kriek Lambic, and she went from hating all beer, to asking me yesterday when I was planning on buying more

Wasn’t there some strange factoid that German monks brewed beer and sent a barrel to the Vatican and asked if it could be consumed during Lent. The Pope being Italian and used to only fine wines thought if the German monks want to drink something that tastes this awful during Lent let them.

 

[crazzeto]

Wasn’t there some strange factoid that German monks brewed beer and sent a barrel to the Vatican and asked if it could be consumed during Lent. The Pope being Italian and used to only fine wines thought if the German monks want to drink something that tastes this awful during Lent let them.

I’ve not heard any such thing, but it’s true we Italians (I am one) are typically more accustomed to wine than beer. Though since this is German beer we’re talking about, I must imagine it spoiled on it’s way to Rome, they typically make terrific beer!