There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

[cazayoux]

The Roman Catholic Church teaches infant baptismal regeneration. How can the infant believe?

Baptism is the new circumcision, which was the sign of the covenant with God.
Babies were brought into that covenant with circumcision when they were 8 days old.
Do you think, the new circumcision is now off limits to babies?
Why would God allow babies into the covenant before Jesus and not afterward.

Babies circumcised on the 8th day, also could not profess faith. Their parents spoke for them.

Babies baptized today, cannot profess faith. Their parents speak for them.

The early Christian debates regarding baptism was not about to baptize babies or not … but did babies need to be baptized on the eight day.

These newfangled ideas of yours don’t mesh with history or scripture.

michel

 

[cazayoux]

Maybe Jesus is speaking of our physical birth (water) and our spiritual birth (Spirit)?

hehehehe … another funny idea.
baptism from our placental fluid??

Then why was the Ethiopian eunuch baptism from water on the side of the road?

michel

 

[mikeledes]

This is a baptism done by the Spirit and not by men (priests and pastors). Consider the Holy Scriptures for truth.

How did the early Church Fathers interpret “water and the Spirit?”

Justin Martyr

"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit [Matt. 28:19], they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus

**"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]). **

Tertullian

“[N]o one can attain salvation without baptism, especially in view of the declaration of the Lord, who says, ‘Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life’” (Baptism 12:1 [A.D. 203]).

Hippolytus

**'The Father of immortality sent the immortal Son and Word into the world, who came to man in order to wash him with water and the Spirit; and he, begetting us again to incorruption of soul and body, breathed into us the Spirit of life, and endued us with an incorruptible panoply. If, therefore, man has become immortal, he will also be God. And if he is made God by water and the Holy Spirit after the regeneration of the laver he is found to be also joint-heir with Christ after the resurrection from the dead. Wherefore I preach to this effect: Come, all ye kindreds of the nations, to the immortality of the baptism" (Discourse on the Holy Theophany 8 [A.D. 217]). **

This was also the way Augustine interpreted that verse and was the view upheld in the Council of Orange, which many Calvinists often cite:

**CANON 5. If anyone says that not only the increase of faith but also its beginning and the very desire for faith, by which we believe in Him who justifies the ungodly and comes to the regeneration of holy baptism **

This is the biblical and historic teaching of the church for 1, 500 years until it was challenged by John Calvin. I find it odd that something as fundamental to the Christian understanding of salvation as regeneration would in no way resemble Calvinist teaching and even be contradicted by those sources which they often cite as hitorical references (Augustine and the Council of Orange). The Spirit works through Christian baptism to regenerate the person.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

Yes, for those who are and remain in Christ:

John 15:2-6

**2"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.
3"You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
4"Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.
5"I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. **

Hebrews 6:4-6

4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

Hebrews 12:25

**25See to it that you do not refuse Him who is speaking For if those did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape who turn away from Him who warns from heaven. **

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

The Roman Catholic Church teaches infant baptismal regeneration. How can the infant believe?

I really think we are going off topic. But let me just say the following. First let’s talk about the practice of infant baptism. Regarding this practice, John Calvin said:

Every one must now see that paedobaptism, which receives such strong support from Scripture, is by no means of human invention. Nor is there anything plausible in the objection, that we no where read of even one infant having been baptised by the hands of the apostles. For although this is not expressly na by the Evangelists, yet as they are not expressly excluded when mention is made of any baptised family, (Acts 16: 15, 32,) what man of sense will argue from this that they were not baptised? If such kinds of argument were good, it would be necessary, in like manner, to interdict women from the Lord’s Supper, since we do not read that they were ever admitted to it in the days of the apostles. But here we are contented with the rule of faith. For when we reflect on the nature of the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper, we easily judge who the persons are to whom the use of it is to be communicated. The same we observe in the case of baptism. For, attending to the end for which it was instituted, we clearly perceive that it is not less applicable to children than to those of more advanced years and that therefore, they cannot be deprived of it without manifest fraud to the will of its divine Author. The assertion which they disseminate among the common people, that a long series of years elapsed after the resurrection at Christ, during which paedobaptism was unknown, is a shameful falsehood, since there is no writer, however ancient, who does not trace its origin to the days of the apostles.

apuritansmind.com/Baptism/CalvinInfantBaptism.htm

John Calvin - the man you said tried to get as far away from Rome as possible - believed that infant baptism was the biblical and historic practice of Christianity. He clearly states that there is “no writer, however ancient, who does not trace its origin to the days of the apostles.” This is also the view of many contemporary Calvinists, particularly those that belong to the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches. Since they have accepted the practice of infant baptism as biblical and historical, then what did the ancient writers Calvin made reference to say that baptism actually does?

Let’s first take a look at Irenaeus:

**“He [Jesus] came to save all through himself; all, I say, who through him are reborn in God: infants, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, sanctifying infants; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age” (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

“‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]” (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]). **

And what did Augustine say regarding infant baptism?

"By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive . . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]).

So John Calvin is absolutely right. The practice of infant baptism dates back to the “days of the apostles.” However, he rejects the historic understanding of baptism that days back to the apsotles, namely, baptismal regeneration. Baptismal regeneration was unanimoulsy taught by the early Church Fathers and was the understanding of Christianity until John Calvin challenged it.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

TriuneUnity, do you think the following article accurately explains Lutheran belief concerning Confession and Absolution?:

lifeoftheworld.com/believe/waconfessionabsolution.php

Thanks in advance!

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Reformed]

Yes, for those who are and remain in Christ:…

God Bless,
Michael

Thanks for sharing those verses. These are warnings showing the distinction between the visible church and the invisble church. Those who do not abide and turn away show themselves to be only members of the visible church. However, they were never united to Christ. The evidence is by their apostasy. We cannot call God a liar to say that the Triune God was unable to prevent His adopted children from being lost. Receive the promises of God because we know faith pleases Him. Unbelief is sin. God in Christ will save all of His sheep. The apostates are the goats in the visible church.

I Am the Good Shepherd

“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber. But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” This figure of speech Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”

There was again a division among the Jews because of these words. Many of them said, “He has a demon, and is insane; why listen to him?” Others said, “These are not the words of one who is oppressed by a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”

I and the Father Are One

At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon. So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.”

31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” 33 The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” 34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken— 36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; 38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” 39 Again they sought to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands.

40 He went away again across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing at first, and there he remained. 41 And many came to him. And they said, “John did no sign, but everything that John said about this man was true.” 42 And many believed in him there. - John 10

 

[Reformed]

The apostates were never united to Christ. The Bible calls them tares and goats. Without receiving the truth of the invisible church within the visible church, you will walk in fear.

Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father. ** And this is the promise that he made to us —eternal life.**

I write these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you. But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him. 1 John 2

Future Glory

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because [6] the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. 28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, [7] for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

God’s Everlasting Love

31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be [8] against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? 33 Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. [9] 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written,

“For your sake we are being killed all the day long;
we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”

37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. - Rom 8

 

[Reformed]

I really think we are going off topic. But let me just say the following. First let’s talk about the practice of infant baptism. Regarding this practice, John Calvin said:

[God Bless,
Michael

I have no issues with biblical infant baptism. I believe all covenant children should be baptized in infancy as a sign and a seal. However, infant baptismal regeneration is a false doctrine. Household baptism does not mean that the entire family is regenerated by the household baptism. Just like Israel, all the males were circumcised, but not all Israel were circumcised in the heart. The same is true with water baptism.

25 For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. 26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded [2] as circumcision? 27 Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code [3] and circumcision but break the law. 28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. 29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. - Rom 2
[/quote]

 

[Reformed]

Do you think Simon was born again after being baptized? I think he is evidence that water baptism does not regenerate a sinner.

Acts 8

Simon the Magician Believes

But there was a man named Simon, who had previously practiced magic in the city and amazed the people of Samaria, saying that he himself was somebody great. They all paid attention to him, from the least to the greatest, saying, “This man is the power of God that is called Great.” 11 And they paid attention to him because for a long time he had amazed them with his magic. 12 But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Even Simon himself believed, and after being baptized he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles [2] performed, he was amazed.

Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. 18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, 19 saying, “Give me this power also, so that anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! 21 You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. 22 Repent, therefore, of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. 23 For I see that you are in the gall [3] of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.” 24 And Simon answered, “Pray for me to the Lord, that nothing of what you have said may come upon me.”
25 Now when they had testified and spoken the word of the Lord, they returned to Jerusalem, preaching the gospel to many villages of the Samaritans.

 

[East_and_West]

The Roman Catholic Church teaches infant baptismal regeneration. How can the infant believe?

First, you are dodging the issue. Nice try but I won’t allow it. You first need to address the fact that Jesus taught that necessity of baptism for salvation.
Second, it was the universal practice of the Church to baptize infants from the very begining. It was the protestant “reformers” who were the cause of innovation.
Third, God is merciful and just. Of course an infant is not capable of belief. But does that mean that he will whithold his grace from them? NO! This is the God who says “let the little children come to me.” This is the God who adopted infant males into the family through circumcision even though they were incapable of making a covenant with God. Rather, the parents stood in the place of the Child and made the covenant with God. Likewise, in the new Covenenant, the parents stand in the place of the Child and have the child baptized. By the baptism and the faith of the parents the infant is born again. I can’t believe you would even suggest that God would withold his grace from an infant.

 

[Reformed]

First, you are dodging the issue. Nice try but I won’t allow it. You first need to address the fact that Jesus taught that necessity of baptism for salvation.
Second, it was the universal practice of the Church to baptize infants from the very begining. It was the protestant “reformers” who were the cause of innovation.
Third, God is merciful and just. Of course an infant is not capable of belief. But does that mean that he will whithold his grace from them? NO! This is the God who says “let the little children come to me.” This is the God who adopted infant males into the family through circumcision even though they were incapable of making a covenant with God. Rather, the parents stood in the place of the Child and made the covenant with God. Likewise, in the new Covenenant, the parents stand in the place of the Child and have the child baptized. By the baptism and the faith of the parents the infant is born again. I can’t believe you would even suggest that God would withold his grace from an infant.

Please consider the Scriptures and pesonal experience in regards to infant baptismal regeneration. I too know many nominal Roman Catholics who have been baptized and have no affection or love for God, including relatives. If infant baptism is the means of which the Spirit grants new life, then all who have been baptized including Roman Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox would love God since their are suppose to have received a new heart at baptism. Consider the Scriptures:

You Must Be Born Again

3:1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus [1] by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” 3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again [2] he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. [3] 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You [4] must be born again.’ 8 The wind [5] blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” -John 3

 

[East_and_West]

Please consider the Scriptures and pesonal experience in regards to infant baptismal regeneration. I too know many nominal Roman Catholics who have been baptized and have no affection or love for God, including relatives. If infant baptism is the means of which the Spirit grants new life, then all who have been baptized including Roman Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox would love God since their are suppose to have received a new heart at baptism. Consider the Scriptures:

First, “personal experience” is the way liberals determine truth. It’s really all about how you “feel” about everything.

Second, Being a born again Christian does not automatically mean that you will love God after the experience. Again, it boils down to free will. Will you choose to use the gift after it is given. Many have recieved the grace of God in baptism and still some of those, when they grow older, choose not to use it. Don’t try to impose your man-made protestant ideology onto God.

Third, I used to attend a protestant Church and I knew many who were “saved”. What did I see? I saw fake/ridiculous smiles plastered on faces. It was soooooo fake. What do I see in my Catholic parish? People who genuinely love God. They might not “happy and clappy” 100% of the time but they struggle and strive. They live their love of God in the good and in the muck that life brings about. This is real love. A complete 180 from the protestant Churches that I have seen. Much more genuine than throwing one’s hands in the air and talking about how one is “saved” all the time. Now, as a Catholic, i hear about relying on God’s mercy, carrying our crosses, living the life when it feels good and when it doesn’t feel good.

Consider the scriptures:
“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved.”

and the clentcher:

“[In the ark] a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 3:20–21, emphasis added).

Baptism is what saves you! It is the appeal for a clear consciences becaue it washes away sin just as the waters of the flood washed away the evil doers. Its not just a symbol that washes away the dirt from one’s body.

Never forget, in all your debating, that the scriptures themselves state that Baptism “saves you”.

 

[PerryJ]

I too know many nominal Roman Catholics who have been baptized and have no affection or love for God, including relatives.

Reformed,

I have seen post like this before. I would be careful. We do not want it to appear that we are judging others. I am sure this was not your intent; however, we should be careful with these types of statements. Wether it is a Roman Catholic or a Protestant we do not want to judge another.

 

[TriuneUnity]

TriuneUnity, do you think the following article accurately explains Lutheran belief concerning Confession and Absolution?:

lifeoftheworld.com/believe/waconfessionabsolution.php

Thanks in advance!

God Bless,
Michael

Yep…I think it would be 100% accurate. It’s essentially a longer explanation of what Luther himself wrote in the Small Catechism.

 

[moondweller]

Reformed,

I have seen post like this before. I would be careful. We do not want it to appear that we are judging others. I am sure this was not your intent; however, we should be careful with these types of statements. Wether it is a Roman Catholic or a Protestant we do not want to judge another.

East and West:

Third, I used to attend a protestant Church and I knew many who were “saved”. What did I see? I saw fake/ridiculous smiles plastered on faces. It was soooooo fake.

 

[ralphinal]

Then please explain 2 Peter 1:10

So then, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election certain, for if you keep on doing this you will never fail.

or, for you KJV fans out there

Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

Pete seems to say that you can lose it if you are not careful. Paul talks about persevering until the end. Jesus talks about it being the narrow road. Why is it so hard to grasp that you can fall from grace?

 

[East_and_West]

Why is it so hard to grasp that you can fall from grace?

Because it would much easier to live with the idea that no matter what a person does he will go to heaven. Honestly, its kinda childish. Its like, “I want my may no matter what!”

 

[Reformed]

First, “personal experience” is the way liberals determine truth. It’s really all about how you “feel” about everything.

Second, Being a born again Christian does not automatically mean that you will love God after the experience. Again, it boils down to free will. Will you choose to use the gift after it is given. Many have recieved the grace of God in baptism and still some of those, when they grow older, choose not to use it. Don’t try to impose your man-made protestant ideology onto God.

Third, I used to attend a protestant Church and I knew many who were “saved”. What did I see? I saw fake/ridiculous smiles plastered on faces. It was soooooo fake. What do I see in my Catholic parish? People who genuinely love God. They might not “happy and clappy” 100% of the time but they struggle and strive. They live their love of God in the good and in the muck that life brings about. This is real love. A complete 180 from the protestant Churches that I have seen. Much more genuine than throwing one’s hands in the air and talking about how one is “saved” all the time. Now, as a Catholic, i hear about relying on God’s mercy, carrying our crosses, living the life when it feels good and when it doesn’t feel good.

Consider the scriptures:
“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved.”

and the clentcher:

“[In the ark] a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. 3:20–21, emphasis added).

Baptism is what saves you! It is the appeal for a clear consciences becaue it washes away sin just as the waters of the flood washed away the evil doers. Its not just a symbol that washes away the dirt from one’s body.

Never forget, in all your debating, that the scriptures themselves state that Baptism “saves you”.

How can you say Baptism saves you if you say people apostate that have been united to Christ? Please let me know your understanding of what we are being saved from and from whom? You cannot hinge your theology based on one Scripture. Roman Catholicism tries to do it with Matthew 16 for apostolic succession. And you try to use Peter 3:20-21 to support baptismal regeneration…ignoring the rest of scripture. Again, pleae let me know your understanding of what we are being saved from and from whom?

 

[mikeledes]

Thanks for sharing those verses. These are warnings showing the distinction between the visible church and the invisble church.

There can be false professors in the “visible church,” but there can never be false professor in Christ, spiritually united to Him. In John 15, what does the vine represent? For your argument to stand, the vine must represent the church or the people of God. However, Jesus clearly defines His own terms:

1"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.
5"I am the vine, you are the branches;

As per Christ, the Vine does not represent a congregation, organized body, or "visible"church. The vine represents the person of Christ. There is not a single time in John where Jesus uses “I AM” to mean any person, place, or thing other than Himself. Hence, Christ is using metaphor to describe spiritual realities, not earthly ones. Mere membership in a congregation represents an earthly reality if one is not spiritually united to Christ. So since the Vine stands for Christ, the branches stand for those who are united to Christ - having become members of His Body - just as a branch is united to Christ and is a member of the vine’s “body.” That’s why Christ explicitly identifies the “branches” as representing the remaining apostles and no one will question that they have been spiritually united to Christ, just as a branch is united to the vine.

Regarding the branches that are “taken away,” it is Christ Himself who describes them as being in Me, not “in My Church” or “in a Christian congregation.” Who is “me?” Christ! So the branch in me is a person in Christ.

Now if “in me” means “my visible body”, then - to be consistent - every time Jesus uses “in me” in John 15, He means “in my visible body.” Otherwise, we end up with a completely arbitrary way of defining terms, making verse 2 the only time in John 15 where “in me” means “my visible body.” And when we replace every “in me” with “my visible body,” we end up with utter nonsense:

2"Every branch in my visible body that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.
3"You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you.
4"Abide in my visible body, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in my visible body.
5"I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in my visible body and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.
6"If anyone does not abide in my visible body he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

So is Christ saying that we must abide in His visible body to bear fruit? That the power to bear fruit comes from merely maintaining membership in a congregation? So if we remain members of a congregation, we will not be thrown away and cast into the fire? That makes no sense. If “in me” means having a vital spiritual union with Christ in verses 4, 5, 6, why does mean “membership in my visible body” in verse 2?

In addition, Christ uses the word abide (Gk “meno”). The William MacDonald’s Believer’s Bible Commentary correctly defines “abide” as meaning “stay where you are.” “Meno” in Greek means to continue in the place, condition, or state one is already in:

studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3306

A couple of examples where this word is used in the Bible are:

Acts 16:15

And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay ."

1 Corinthians 7:9, 20

9but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband ), and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called.

So in order to abide or not abide, one must first be in the place or condition abide is making reference to. You must first enter a house before you can abide/remain/stay in it. So if a person does not abide in Christ, it means that they were in Christ first. Otherwise, how can you cease to continue or remain in something you were never a part of.

To be continued…

God Bless,
Michael