Water Baptism NOT Necessary for Salvation!

[believers]

Notice he didn’t say WHAT kind of baptism he was talking about. You need the Church to fill in the gap there.

You do not have the liberty of filling in the gap and neither does your religion.

 

[believers]

So wait ---- are you actually saying that original sin does NOT separate humanity from God? Do you agree with Romans Chapter 5 that all of us are born with original sin which separates us from God? So babies who die are separated from God and cannot enter heaven, right? And since you don’t think they can be validly baptized, they’re just totally doomed, right?

All have sinned!

1Jo 1:8
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

1Jo 3:5
And ye know that he (Jesus) was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

2Cr 5:21
For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Rom 3:10
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Rom 3:11
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

Rom 3:12
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

1Ti 1:15 This [is] a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Rom 5:6
For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

 

[believers]

So? Christ didn’t send me to personally baptize anybody, either. What does that have to do with anything? Jesus commanded His clergy in general to baptize, Matt. 28:19.

You need to read your bible. Then you’d understand that Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles. The Christian church was called out of the gentiles.

Paul was the masterbuilder of the Christian faith. Jesus committed the gospel of the uncircumcision onto Paul. That did not include water baptism.

 

[believers]

I have read the entire Bible repeatedly, and I read it daily. Nowhere does it say “baptism only for adults.” And Jesus expressly said we must be born again “of WATER and spirit,” John 3:5

Nowhere does it say infants. It’s says to believe and repent. Babies can do neither.

Jesus was talking to adults when He said “whosoever”… little children already come to him as little children.

Mar 10:15
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.

 

[believers]

You’d better make this case scripturally because I am pretty sure that you are dead wrong here and that in fact there is no such thing discussed in the Word of God.

If all have sinned means exactly what it says then I’d appreciate an explanation as to when exactly a diaper dirtying child sins? I have yet to see an infant that is willfully capable of sinning. Does all apply to these as well? How about someone who is mentally incapacitated from a birth defect? “All” again? How about my sainted Mom who died not even recognizing me from the dementia of Alzheimer’s disease? “All” again? If in her dementia she said something grossly unkind or even sinful, if she is held to account for that as sin, then that is like condemning someone for having a cold, which I have never seen anywhere that the Word of God even implies such.

Yet I do see many accounts in the New Testament where it plainly says that whole households were baptized.

The point is that the blanket “all” argument just defies God-given common sense and Christian compassion.

The “age of accountability” is something I personally believe in. I believe God is a just God. Jesus death and resurrection is offered for the sins of the whole world not just ours. This verse below comes to mind…

1Jo 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.

 

[believers]

Sheesh. Using scripture to make someone feel threatened. How very Christian of you.

Imagine that? The Word of God actually warning of death if you hate reproof.

You shouldn’t be worried if you don’t mind reproof. I already know how the RCC feels about being corrected.

 

[guanophore]

Notice he didn’t say WHAT kind of baptism he was talking about. You need the Church to fill in the gap there.

You do not have the liberty of filling in the gap and neither does your religion.

I am curious about why you seem to have such a rebellious attitude toward the teachings of Jesus? The liberty does not belong to a “religion” but to Jesus.

Do you deny the power of the Great Commission?

Matt 28:18-20
18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Catholics have maintained the Apostolic succession, which means that each ordination goes back to one of the Apostles. The deposit of faith that Jesus has commanded should be taught has been maintained by that succession.

With regard to the children, Jesus said “suffer the little children to come unto me”. For his disciples, they understood that baptism was the way to most fully come to Him. There is no record that any children were ever turned away. Whole households were baptized, and can be presumed to include children.

Nowhere does it say infants. It’s says to believe and repent. Babies can do neither.

Jesus was talking to adults when He said “whosoever”… little children already come to him as little children.

Mar 10:15
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.

You are right, that it does say to believe and repent. All the first disciples were Jews, most of them faithful Jews. They brought their children for circumcision to make them part of the covenant as infants. All of the disciples would understand that Jesus wanted whole families to enter the covenant. Baptism replaces circumcision as the rite of initiation into the New Covenant.

Col 2:10-15
11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; 12 and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14 having canceled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands; this he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in him."

In baptism we die to our old self, and are made one with Christ, and made members of His body. In baptism He forgives all our trespasses, cancelling the bod which stood against us. Baptism joins us with the saving grace poured out from Jesus death on the cross. We triumph over teh principalities and powers.

 

[believers]

We crossed posts – sort of — you were editing this one as I replied.

You think that a baby who dies is doomed to hell? Niiiiice. Well, I disagree. Jesus said not to stop the little children from coming to Him. How are they supposed to do that under your system? They can’t. Praise God, he allows babies to be baptized — just as, under the Old Covenant, He allowed babies to be circumcized and thereby join His chosen people even though they were too young to have faith of their own.

No I don’t. I believe in the age of accountability which includes aborted babies. So tell me, what happens to aborted babies and babies that don’t get a chance to get water baptized?

 

[believers]

Wait, what? You believe that original sin separates humanity from God, right? And babies have original sin, right? Romans 5: 12-19 spells out original sin pretty clearly — we all inherit it. So how can babies enter heaven under your system, since Revelation 21:27 tells us that “nothing unclean shall enter” heaven?

And I did answer your question above – we crossed posts.

Yes, but Christ’s death was the propitiation for the whole world. I personally believe in the age of accountability. I believe God to be just and loving God.

 

[believers]

This is because nobody questioned the authority of the church until the heretics came along. You do realize that probably the first ones to do so were the Arians (who used Paul to come to their own novel Christology). And we have their spiritual successors among us today: the JWs. They reject the doctrine of the Trinity because they have no tradition or council to clarify the scriptures and fill in the blanks for them. At least they’re consistent.

Let me ask you: do you believe in the Trinity in the way that the CC believes (and as the council of Nicea, St. Athanasius, and the Nicean-Constantinopolitan Creed teach?). That God is not One with three “modes”? That there are three Persons in the Trinity, and all are made up of one Substance? “God from God, light from light, true God from true God”? That Jesus isn’t a creature Who “was in the form of God,” and “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped”? Do you believe all this?

Trinity… God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.

As in Rom 3:23 For all (mankind, the creature Jesus Created in Genesis) have sinned, and come short of the glory of God (God the Father, Jesus, Holy Spirit);

 

[believers]

The problem here is that you have no evidence that these are the only examples of doctrines/practices conferred by tradition. What you mean is that these are TRUE traditions as opposed to those UNTRUE Catholic traditions, which is an arrogant assumption altogether. You cannot prove this by sola scriptura.

The problem here is that Paul said to hold fast to the traditions that were taught by Him in his epistle… Fortunately for me, your RCC traditions are not listed.

 

[guanophore]

You need to read your bible. Then you’d understand that Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles. The Christian church was called out of the gentiles.

Paul was the masterbuilder of the Christian faith. Jesus committed the gospel of the uncircumcision onto Paul. That did not include water baptism.

I agree that everyone should read their bible. And I agree that Paul was the apostle to the gentiles. And I agree that the charism given to Paul was preaching, and teaching. None of that amounts to not including water baptism. Of course it included water baptism! Starting with Paul’s baptism:

Acts 9:15-19
15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; 16 for I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” 17 So Anani’as departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized, 19 and took food and was strengthened.

If you check the context of this passage, you will see that NOWHERE does God instruct Ananias to baptize Paul. This was the customary practice when one believed and repented. It was administered to ALL because that is what Jesus commanded should be done.

Paul’s ministry was preaching and teaching, but others did the baptizing:

" For it has been reported to me by Chlo’e’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brethren. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apol’los,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I am thankful that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Ga’ius; 15 lest any one should say that you were baptized in my name. 16(I did baptize also the household of Steph’anas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any one else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power."1 Cor 1:11-17

Clearly ALL WERE BAPTIZED! He did not do it personally, as he was called to other duties, just as Jesus did not baptize, but appointed His apostles to that duty:

John 4:1-3
4:1 Now when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2(although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples), 3 he left Judea and departed again to Galilee."

Why do you think Jesus would have his disciples doing baptisms if He did not want it done?! Notice also, that HIs disciples “stood for Him” during baptism. They did so 'in HIs name" and it was the same as if He did it Himself.

I will put to you the same question that Jesus asked his detractors:

Mark 11:30
Was the baptism of John from heaven or from men? Answer me."

If you are not a pharisee, which I do not think you are, you will acknowledge that baptism for the repentance of sins is from heaven. Why would you refuse a heavenly gift? Do you deny that Jesus commanded baptism for the obedient to the faith?

Why did Peter baptize the house of Cornelius?

“While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45 And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 “Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.” Acts 10:44-48

He could plainly see that they had already believed, repented, and received the HS. What need of there was baptism? Jesus commanded it, and it is the normative means by which He brings people into His body. Peter baptized them because Jesus told him to do so. Are we to be less obedient?

 

[believers]

I agree that everyone should read their bible. And I agree that Paul was the apostle to the gentiles. And I agree that the charism given to Paul was preaching, and teaching. None of that amounts to not including water baptism. Of course it included water baptism! Starting with Paul’s baptism:

Acts 9:15-19
15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; 16 for I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.” 17 So Anani’as departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 And immediately something like scales fell from his eyes and he regained his sight. Then he rose and was baptized, 19 and took food and was strengthened.

If you check the context of this passage, you will see that NOWHERE does God instruct Ananias to baptize Paul. This was the customary practice when one believed and repented. It was administered to ALL because that is what Jesus commanded should be done.

Paul’s ministry was preaching and teaching, but others did the baptizing:

" For it has been reported to me by Chlo’e’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brethren. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apol’los,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I am thankful that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Ga’ius; 15 lest any one should say that you were baptized in my name. 16(I did baptize also the household of Steph’anas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any one else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power."1 Cor 1:11-17

Clearly ALL WERE BAPTIZED! He did not do it personally, as he was called to other duties, just as Jesus did not baptize, but appointed His apostles to that duty:

John 4:1-3
4:1 Now when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2(although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples), 3 he left Judea and departed again to Galilee."

Why do you think Jesus would have his disciples doing baptisms if He did not want it done?! Notice also, that HIs disciples “stood for Him” during baptism. They did so 'in HIs name" and it was the same as if He did it Himself.

I will put to you the same question that Jesus asked his detractors:

Mark 11:30
Was the baptism of John from heaven or from men? Answer me."

If you are not a pharisee, which I do not think you are, you will acknowledge that baptism for the repentance of sins is from heaven. Why would you refuse a heavenly gift? Do you deny that Jesus commanded baptism for the obedient to the faith?

Why did Peter baptize the house of Cornelius?

“While Peter was still saying this, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45 And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 “Can any one forbid water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.” Acts 10:44-48

He could plainly see that they had already believed, repented, and received the HS. What need of there was baptism? Jesus commanded it, and it is the normative means by which He brings people into His body. Peter baptized them because Jesus told him to do so. Are we to be less obedient?

1Cr 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

 

[guanophore]

1Cr 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

Although baptism is considered normative, and Paul did baptize some, this was not his calling. he was called as a preacher. He functioned according to the grace that was given to him (some duties, but not all)

2 Peter 3:15-16
So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 speaking of this as he does in all his letters.

Certain wisdom was given him, but not ALL wisdom.

1 Cor 12:28-30
God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?"

Can you imagine, if only the 12 apostles were baptizing, how long it would take to baptize 3000 people? Paul understood that he was not called to baptize all the disciples, and he was thankful that he did not do all the baptizing, so that the believers would not think they belonged to him, instead of Jesus.

 

[Nazianzen]

You do not have the liberty of filling in the gap and neither does your religion.

By that logic, neither do you or your religion, which means we’re just out of luck and the HS has abandoned us.

But think for a moment, my religion does have the liberty to define what books are included in the NT. You don’t read the Gospel of Thomas or the Acts of Peter or the Epistles of Clement and the Didache. And to think, those guys are smart enough to recognize the NT out of the mess of orthodox and unorthodox early chrisitan writings.

 

[Nazianzen]

Trinity… God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.

Congratulations! You paid attention in Sunday School!

As in Rom 3:23 For all (mankind, the creature Jesus Created in Genesis) have sinned, and come short of the glory of God (God the Father, Jesus, Holy Spirit);

Uh, Romans 3:23 never once says anything about God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. In fact, if you only read this passage, it speaks of God the Father as simply “God” and God the Son as simply “Jesus.” It speaks of them as if they are different entities. You will NEVER be able to prove that God is one God made up of three Persons who are coeternal and consubstantial from scripture alone.

Notice you are having to “fill in the gaps” in order to show the Trinity in scripture. I wonder where you got the filling from?

Hmmm.

 

[Nazianzen]

The problem here is that Paul said to hold fast to the traditions that were taught by Him in his epistle… Fortunately for me, your RCC traditions are not listed.

You’re misrepresenting what Paul said. He didn’t say to hold fast only to traditions taught by him in his epistles.

“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.” (2 Thes. 2:15)

Of *course *there are some traditions not listed. He never indicated that his epistles or scripture in general would be “complete.”

 

[Gamera]

No I don’t. I believe in the age of accountability which includes aborted babies. So tell me, what happens to aborted babies and babies that don’t get a chance to get water baptized?

"As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus’ tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,“64 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church’s call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism” CCC 1261.

Now answer my question, please. If “faith alone” saves, then YOU tell ME what happens to babies who die. They cannot have faith, so according to your religious tradition, they cannot be saved. Right? You admit that they are separated from God by original sin, according to Romans Chapter 5. So how are they saved from hell? Does God waive the faith requirement? What chapter and verse tell you that?

 

[Gamera]

Trinity… God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.

As in Rom 3:23 For all (mankind, the creature Jesus Created in Genesis) have sinned, and come short of the glory of God (God the Father, Jesus, Holy Spirit);

Apparently you missed this.

God says that NOT “all” men have sinned in the sense that you mean “all.” Look at Luke 1:6, which describes Zechariah and his wife Elizabeth (parents of John the Baptist). “Both of them were righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord BLAMELESSLY,” Luke 1:6.

“Blamelessly!” It’s right there in Luke 1:6. Zechariah and Elizabeth were BLAMELESS. This cannot be true under your interpretation of Romans 3:23 that literally ALL human beings have committed personal sin.

A few verses earlier, in Romans 3:10-12, Paul quotes from the Old Testament to say, “None is righteous, no, not one …” Look at what Paul quotes from to understand the reference. Paul here quotes from Psalm 14, which says :

“The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, THERE IS NONE THAT DOES GOOD. The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there are any who act wisely, that seek after God. They have all gone astray, they are all alike and corrupt; THERE IS NONE THAT DOES GOOD, NO, NOT ONE. Have they no knowledge, ALL THE EVILDOERS WHO EAT UP MY PEOPLE as they eat bread, and do not call upon the Lord? There they shall be in great terror, FOR GOD IS WITH THE GENERATION OF THE RIGHTEOUS.” Psalm 14. 1-5.

See? Psalm 14 contrasts “all,” meaning all EVILDOERS, as opposed to the HIS PEOPLE, (verse 4) who are RIGHTEOUS (verse 5). That is what Paul quotes from in Romans Chapter 3, verses 10-12. He is quoting a verse in which “all” obviously does not mean every single human being.

Under your reading of Romans, there are NO righteous people, because “all means all.” But Scripture cannot contradict Scripture. We must understand one Scripture in light of the others. God says that there ARE righteous people who have not committed personal sin, including Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:6). Therefore we know that “all” does not mean literally every human being, because then Luke 1:6 would be in error.

What is your response to Zechariah and Elizabeth being “BLAMELESS”? How does that fit your religious tradition that “all” literally means “all”?

 

[Gamera]

Yes, but Christ’s death was the propitiation for the whole world. I personally believe in the age of accountability. I believe God to be just and loving God.

Chapter and verse for “age of accountability”? Where do you find that in Scripture? Since no “age of accountability” is given by Scripture, why do you believe it?

You’re trying to have it both ways. Either Christ’s death was the salvation of the whole world or it wasn’t. If original sin separates humanity from God, and one must exercise “faith” to claim that salvation, then babies cannot be saved. Period.

Thank God that He IS a just and loving God, and therefore He gave us the precious gift of Baptism so that we can save sweet little babies despite their lack of personal faith.