What's a clear, charitable "come-back" for protestants?

[jmcrae]

Read the whole passage, please. Jesus alredy explained that He is talking to the unsaved.

How so? They are calling Him “Lord, Lord.” They are doing miracles in His name. They are preaching and witnessing. If mental assent alone is enough, these people have it. What went wrong?

 

[jmcrae]

And, as usual, the Roman Catholic is forced to take parts of a verse of scripture out of context.

I am highlighting the salient portion of the verse. I gave you the full context, above.

How can you sit there and type “it does not say,” when clearly, it does so say that baptism saves us?

Not baptism all by itself, and certainly not “symbolic baptism” in which Christ is not invited to act through it.

We also have many other sayings of Jesus and the Apostles, and there are other things we need to be doing, as well. But this is one of the things that we have to do - we cannot omit it.

 

[FredSmith]

How so? They are calling Him “Lord, Lord.” They are doing miracles in His name. They are preaching and witnessing. If mental assent alone is enough, these people have it. What went wrong?

But that’s just the problem: mental assent is not enough.

Notice that the first thing Jesus does in the passage is to seperate sheep from goats. That is, the saved from the unsaved.

 

[FredSmith]

How can you sit there and type “it does not say,” when clearly, it does so say that baptism saves us?

Because, while, when a few words are lifted from the passage out of context, it may appear to say that baptism saves, when the passage is taken as a whole, it is very clear that baptism is a symbol and does not save in and of itself.

 

[jmcrae]

And, as usual, the Roman Catholic is forced to take parts of a verse of scripture out of context.

Do you have answers for any of my questions?

I am very interested in how you interpret these verses. What do you think they mean, and what do you do, in response to them?

 

[FredSmith]

Many Protestant groups have replaced Baptism with the un-scriptural “Sinner’s Prayer” as a means of “making their decision for Christ.” But Baptism is the real means of accepting Christ.

While we do not believe in the sinners’ prayer, we do recognize those who do and the prayer has never been a replacement for baptism. They are two different things.

You will not find one church that teaches that this prayer is a replacement for baptism.

You were already refered to Peter 3:21.

Yes, I was referred to it twice and I already debunked the claim that it says that baptism saves.

What you and your group fail to grasp is that Christ/God is directly involved with the Sacrament. Since Christ is the ultimate administrator, yes, it is a means of salvation.

Christians do recognize that Christ is directly involved with this ordinance. What Roman Catholics fail to realize that all of Christ’s saving work was finished at the cross.

In your scheme, God is - at best - a mere observer. And thus, your “baptism” is a REAL “work”, with no grace whatsoever from God.

No, in your lies about us, God is a mere observer. We believe that God is very much active and that baptism cannot be a work unto salvation because the baptizee is already saved.

 

[jmcrae]

Because, while, when a few words are lifted from the passage out of context, it may appear to say that baptism saves, when the passage is taken as a whole, it is very clear that baptism is a symbol and does not save in and of itself.

Of course not. How I understand these verses is that God acts through baptism, thus making the symbol into a Sacrament. It is not just a bath; it’s a Sacrament. It cleanses the soul from sin; not the body from dirt.

How do you interpret them?

Would you say that these verses are saying that baptism is unnecessary? If so, how so?

Would you say that these verses are forbidding baptism? If so, how so?

 

[fbl9]

So then, when you disagree with me, it’s because you’re defending the alleged “one true church that Christ founded”, but when I disagree with you, I’m just here to argue?

That’s quite a little double standard you’ve got there.

And, by the way, you never did answer my question about the nature of Christ.

why ask me? you are the one who came here to tell us we are all wrong even if i did tell you agrue with me that i am wrong and do not even know my Lord. dusting off my sandals. GB

 

[Mannyfit75]

Actually, I responded to and debunked each one of them.

and they have been debunked back.

You know, given that you have the spelling and grammar of a five year old, I don’t know that I’d be calling anybody an idiot if I were you

My grammar is fine thank you very much. There are times when I don’t have the time to edit them, so excuse me, Freddie boy.

 

[Mannyfit75]

And, as usual, the Roman Catholic is forced to take parts of a verse of scripture out of context.

Not so. All your objection have been refuted.

Scripture

I. Born Again in Water Baptism

John 1:32 - when Jesus was baptized, He was baptized in the water and the Spirit, which descended upon Him in the form of a dove. The Holy Spirit and water are required for baptism. Also, Jesus’ baptism was not the Christian baptism He later instituted. Jesus’ baptism was instead a royal anointing of the Son of David (Jesus) conferred by a Levite (John the Baptist) to reveal Christ to Israel, as it was foreshadowed in 1 Kings 1:39 when the Son of David (Solomon) was anointed by the Levitical priest Zadok. See John 1:31; cf. Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:9; Luke 3:21.

John 3:3,5 - Jesus says, “Truly, truly, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” When Jesus said “water and the Spirit,” He was referring to baptism (which requires the use of water, and the work of the Spirit).

John 3:22 - after teaching on baptism, John says Jesus and the disciples did what? They went into Judea where the disciples baptized. Jesus’ teaching about being reborn by water and the Spirit is in the context of baptism.

John 4:1 - here is another reference to baptism which naturally flows from Jesus’ baptismal teaching in John 3:3-5.

Acts 8:36 – the eunuch recognizes the necessity of water for his baptism. Water and baptism are never separated in the Scriptures.

Acts 10:47 - Peter says “can anyone forbid water for baptizing these people…?” The Bible always links water and baptism.

Acts 22:16 – Ananias tells Saul, “arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins.” The “washing away” refers to water baptism.

Titus 3:5-6 – Paul writes about the “washing of regeneration,” which is “poured out on us” in reference to water baptism. “Washing” (loutron) generally refers to a ritual washing with water.

Heb. 10:22 – the author is also writing about water baptism in this verse. “Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.” Our bodies are washed with pure water in water baptism.

2 Kings 5:14 - Naaman dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, and his flesh was restored like that of a child. This foreshadows the regenerative function of baptism, by water and the Holy Spirit.

Isaiah 44:3 - the Lord pours out His water and His Spirit. Water and the Spirit are linked to baptism. The Bible never separates them.

Ezek. 36:25-27 - the Lord promises He will sprinkle us with water to cleanse us from sin and give us a new heart and spirit. Paul refers to this verse in Heb. 10:22. The teaching of Ezekiel foreshadows the salvific nature of Christian baptism instituted by Jesus and taught in John 3:5, Titus 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21 and Acts 22:16.

 

[Mannyfit75]

II. Baptism is Salvific, Not Just Symbolic

Matt. 28:19-20 - Jesus commands the apostles to baptize all people “in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” Many Protestant churches are now teaching that baptism is only a symbolic ritual, and not what actually cleanses us from original sin. This belief contradicts Scripture and the 2,000 year-old teaching of the Church.

Acts 2:38 - Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 2:38 - there is nothing in these passages or elsewhere in the Bible about baptism being symbolic. There is also nothing about just accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior in order to be saved.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus said “He who believes AND is baptized will be saved.” Jesus says believing is not enough. Baptism is also required. This is because baptism is salvific, not just symbolic. The Greek text also does not mandate any specific order for belief and baptism, so the verse proves nothing about a “believer’s baptism.”

John 3:3,5 - unless we are “born again” of water and Spirit in baptism, we cannot enter into the kingdom of God. The Greek word for the phrase “born again” is “anothen” which literally means “begotten from above.” See, for example, John 3:31 where “anothen” is so used. Baptism brings about salvation, not just a symbolism of our salvation.

Acts 8:12-13; 36; 10:47 - if belief is all one needs to be saved, why is everyone instantly baptized after learning of Jesus?

Acts 16:15; 31-33; 18:8; 19:2,5 - these texts present more examples of people learning of Jesus, and then immediately being baptized. If accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior is all one needs to do to be saved, then why does everyone in the early Church immediately seek baptism?

 

[FredSmith]

How do you interpret them?

I don’t. I go by what the text says.

Would you say that these verses are saying that baptism is unnecessary? If so, how so?

Not unecessary, just not a means of salvation.

Would you say that these verses are forbidding baptism? If so, how so?

If I believed that, then why am I defending baptism so vigorously?

 

[Mannyfit75]

Acts 9:18 - Paul, even though he was directly chosen by Christ and immediately converted to Christianity, still had to be baptized to be forgiven his sin. This is a powerful text which demonstrates the salvific efficacy of water baptism, even for those who decide to give their lives to Christ.

Acts 22:16 - Ananias tells Paul, “arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins,” even though Paul was converted directly by Jesus Christ. This proves that Paul’s acceptance of Jesus as personal Lord and Savior was not enough to be forgiven of his sin and saved. The sacrament of baptism is required.

Acts 22:16 - further, Ananias’ phrase “wash away” comes from the Greek word “apolouo.” “Apolouo” means an actual cleansing which removes sin. It is not a symbolic covering up of sin. Even though Jesus chose Paul directly in a heavenly revelation, Paul had to be baptized to have his sins washed away.

Rom. 6:4 - in baptism, we actually die with Christ so that we, like Him, might be raised to newness of life. This means that, by virtue of our baptism, our sufferings are not in vain. They are joined to Christ and become efficacious for our salvation.

1 Cor. 6:11 - Paul says they were washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, in reference to baptism. The “washing” of baptism gives birth to sanctification and justification, which proves baptism is not just symbolic.

Gal. 3:27 - whoever is baptized in Christ puts on Christ. Putting on Christ is not just symbolic. Christ actually dwells within our soul.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Col. 2:12 - in baptism, we literally die with Christ and are raised with Christ. It is a supernatural reality, not just a symbolic ritual. The Scriptures never refer to baptism as symbolic.

Titus 3:5-7 – “He saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ, so that we might be justified by His grace and become heirs of eternal life.” This is a powerful text which proves that baptism regenerates our souls and is thus salvific. The “washing of regeneration” “saves us.” Regeneration is never symbolic, and the phrase “saved us” refers to salvation. By baptism, we become justified by His grace (interior change) and heirs of eternal life (filial adoption). Because this refers to baptism, the verse is about the beginning of the life in Christ. No righteous deeds done before baptism could save us. Righteous deeds after baptism are necessary for our salvation.

There is also a definite parallel between John 3:5 and Titus 3:5: (1) John 3:5 – enter the kingdom of God / Titus 3:5 – He saved us. (2) John 3:5 – born of water / Titus 3:5 – washing. (3) John 3:5 – born of the Spirit / Titus 3:5 – renewal in the Spirit.

Heb. 10:22 - in baptism, our hearts are sprinkled clean from an evil conscience (again, dealing with the interior of the person) as our bodies are washed with pure water (the waters of baptism). Baptism regenerates us because it removes original sin, sanctifies our souls, and effects our adoption as sons and daughters in Jesus Christ.

1 Peter 3:21 - Peter expressly writes that “baptism, corresponding to Noah’s ark, now saves you; not as a removal of dirt from the body, but for a clear conscience. “ Hence, the verse demonstrates that baptism is salvific (it saves us), and deals with the interior life of the person (purifying the conscience, like Heb. 10:22), and not the external life (removing dirt from the body). Many scholars believe the phrase “not as a removal of dirt from the body” is in reference to the Jewish ceremony of circumcision (but, at a minimum, shows that baptism is not about the exterior, but interior life). Baptism is now the “circumcision” of the new Covenant (Col. 2:11-12), but it, unlike the old circumcision, actually saves us, as Noah and his family were saved by water.

Again, notice the parallel between Heb. 10:22 and 1 Peter 3:21: (1) Heb. 10:22 – draw near to the sanctuary (heaven) / 1 Peter 3:21 – now saves us. (2) Heb. 10:22 – sprinkled clean, washed with pure water / 1 Peter 3:20-21 – saved through water, baptism. (3) Heb. 10:22 – from an evil conscience (interior) / 1 Peter 3:21 – for a clear conscience (interior). Titus 3:6 and 1 Peter 3:21 also specifically say the grace and power of baptism comes “through Jesus Christ” (who transforms our inner nature).

Mark 16:16 - Jesus says that he who believes and is baptized will be saved. However, the Church has always taught that baptism is a normative, not an absolute necessity. There are some exceptions to the rule because God is not bound by His sacraments.

Luke 23:43 - the good thief, although not baptized, shows that there is also a baptism by desire, as Jesus says to him that he will be in paradise. It should also be noted that when Jesus uses the word “paradise,” He did not mean heaven. Paradise, from the Hebrew “sheol” meant the realm of the righteous dead. This was the place of the dead who were destined for heaven, but who were captive until the Lord’s resurrection. Hence, the good thief was destined for heaven because of his desire to be with Jesus.

Matt. 20:22-23; Mark 10:38-39; Luke 12:50 - there is also a baptism by blood. Lord says, “I have a baptism to be baptized with” referring to His death. Hence, the Church has always taught that those martyred for the faith may be saved without water baptism (e.g., the Holy Innocents).

Mark 10:38 - Jesus says “are you able…to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?,” referring to His death.

1 John 5:6 - Jesus came by water and blood. He was baptized by both water and blood. Martyrs are baptized by blood.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Because, while, when a few words are lifted from the passage out of context, it may appear to say that baptism saves, when the passage is taken as a whole, it is very clear that baptism is a symbol and does not save in and of itself.

Well I am declaring this thread officially “hijacked”.

Just curious Fred if you are of the protestant sect that demands full immersion of as you say the “symbol” of Baptism or you subscribe to the Catholic practice of “sprinkling”.

I just want to know how far you fundamentally take to heart that Baptism is a mere symbol.

James

 

[SD_Catholic]

Christian.

OK… do you attend a church, or a building for worshiping God? or do you simply pick up the Bible and read?.. This is not a trick question… most people will atleast admit they attend some denomination’s place of worship. You seem proud of what you believe in so I would think you would be able to give an answer to a simple question about where you gather with people who share in your beliefs.

SD

 

[IgnatiusJReilly]

when the passage is taken as a whole, it is very clear that baptism is a symbol and does not save in and of itself.

From the NIV

“He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, 19through whom[d] also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism** that now saves you also**—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge[e] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.”

The only place in this verse where something is clearly denoted as symbolic is the floodwaters at the time of Noah.

Further, the Early Church clearly interpreted their Scriptures and the teachings of the apostles to mean that baptism was, in fact, efficacious for salvation.

Even Martin Luther kept this belief about baptism.

I can’t find any Early Church writer who felt that baptism was “just a symbol”. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

 

[FredSmith]

Acts 2:38 - Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

And I notice that you left out the part of that verse that tells us that the salvation comes from calling on the name of the Lord.

Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 2:38 - there is nothing in these passages or elsewhere in the Bible about baptism being symbolic. There is also nothing about just accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior in order to be saved.

Accepting Jesus Christ as savior and lord in order to be saved is just as Unbiblical as being baptized to be saved.

That doesn’t negate the fact that nowhere in either of these verses are we told that baptism saves us.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus said “He who believes AND is baptized will be saved.” Jesus says believing is not enough.

Where in that passage does Jesus say that baptism is required for salvation?

John 3:3,5 - unless we are “born again” of water and Spirit in baptism, we cannot enter into the kingdom of God. The Greek word for the phrase “born again” is “anothen” which literally means “begotten from above.” See, for example, John 3:31 where “anothen” is so used. Baptism brings about salvation, not just a symbolism of our salvation.

And, as has been pointed out to you many times now, this verse has nothing to do with baptism.

Acts 8:12-13; 36; 10:47 - if belief is all one needs to be saved, why is everyone instantly baptized after learning of Jesus?

Because they’re commanded to.

If that baptism is required for salvation, then why are they baptized after they’re born again?

Acts 16:15; 31-33; 18:8; 19:2,5 - these texts present more examples of people learning of Jesus, and then immediately being baptized. If accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior is all one needs to do to be saved, then why does everyone in the early Church immediately seek baptism?

What does one have to do with the other?

“Accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior” is just as unbiblical as the idea that we’re saved by being baptised. But that one is Unbiblical doesn’t make the other one true.

 

[Mannyfit75]

OK… do you attend a church, or a building for worshiping God? or do you simply pick up the Bible and read?.. This is not a trick question… most people will atleast admit they attend some denomination’s place of worship. You seem proud of what you believe in so I would think you would be able to give an answer to a simple question about where you gather with people who share in your beliefs.

SD

Freddie is a Protestant Christian.

 

[FredSmith]

From the NIV

“He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, 19through whom[d] also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism** that now saves you also**—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge[e] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.”

The only place in this verse where something is clearly denoted as symbolic is the floodwaters at the time of Noah.

Been there. Debunked that.

Further, the Early Church clearly interpreted their Scriptures and the teachings of the apostles to mean that baptism was, in fact, efficacious for salvation.

And they’re welcome to their opinions, but the key word is “interpreted”. The great thing about interpreting something is that you can interpret it to mean anything you like.

That is why we rely on what the text says, not what we imagine it to say.

I can’t find any Early Church writer who felt that baptism was “just a symbol”. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

I wouldn’t care if they all said it. As Christians, we don’t base our doctrine on “Early Church writers”. We base it on God’s word.