Why did Jesus have to be baptized?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Carmelite1983
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gorgias said:
And you can demonstrate, with a quotation, please, that this is what John was doing?
Click to expand...
You mean like a passage that says “Jesus had a wet dream in the night, so he went to the mikveh in accordance with the Law”?

You’re being silly, and straining at a gnat… Anyone with any real knowledge of Judaism will immediately know that this was a mikveh. Certainly none of the Jews I’ve talked to about this event (including a few rabbis) thought otherwise, they knew it intuitively and would be baffled by anyone having to try to find another conclusion.
 
Last edited:
You may consider charmed objects to have real effects if you wish. Until you can demonstrate those effects to me in my lifetime I have simpler models of reality that work for me with less wishful psychosomatic angst.
 
Last edited:
Gorgias said:
40.png
Sophie111:
Until you can demonstrate those effects to me in my lifetime I have simpler models of reality that work for me
Click to expand...
So, you’re saying that baptism has no effect?
Click to expand...
Until you can demonstrate those real spiritual effects to me in my lifetime I have simpler models of reality that work for me.

No I am not yet convinced that charmed objects have real spiritual effects other than the psychosomatic ones that come from the ritual assertion by alleged authority that they do. Are you?
 
Last edited:
Sophie111 said:
Until you can demonstrate those real spiritual effects to me in my lifetime I have simpler models of reality that work for me.
Click to expand...
There must be an echo in here. Either that, or you’ve stuffed your fingers in your ears and are repeating a mantra. 🤣

OK, then: I’ll take “until you can demonstrate” as “no, I don’t believe that baptism has any real effects.” So, since your profile says that you self-identify as a Catholic, I just have to ask: what kind of Catholic disbelieves in the sacraments?
 
Well when you are prepared to address my stated concern/question perhaps we can then address your second guesses about what your personal models of reality force you to infer from my question.
 
Sophie111 said:
Well when you are prepared to address my stated concern/question
Click to expand...
Right after you answer mine, please. In case you’ve forgotten: “real” only means “in the physical world”? (Or, if you prefer, “if something isn’t in the physical world, then it isn’t ‘real’?”)
 
Sophie111 said:
Great apologetics…good luck with that approach.
Click to expand...
Hey – your claim was your non-responsive reply to my question. How can I know how to respond to your question if you’re being coy with where you’re coming from? Good luck with that approach… 😉
 
Sophie111 said:
When you can explain how the “real spiritual effects” alleged is any more demonstrable in this life
Click to expand...
I see. So, you’re saying that “real” means “only what is physically demonstrable.” Got it.

So… you’re claiming to be Catholic, huh? 🤔

(p.s., a Catholic would say that the Eucharist is really the true presence of Christ – body, blood, soul, and divinity. A Catholic would not say that this presence is ‘physically demonstrable’. So, the question remains: are you saying that “real” and “physically demonstrable” are equivalent?)
 
Last edited:
Gorgias said:
40.png
Sophie111:
When you can explain how the “real spiritual effects” alleged is any more demonstrable in this life
Click to expand...
I see. So, you’re saying that “real” means “only what is physically demonstrable.” Got it.

So… you’re claiming to be Catholic, huh? 🤔

(p.s., a Catholic would say that the Eucharist is really the true presence of Christ – body, blood, soul, and divinity. A Catholic would not say that this presence is ‘physically demonstrable’. So, the question remains: are you saying that “real” and “physically demonstrable” are equivalent?)
Click to expand...
Ahem, will you take a question from the ignorant section of observers? If the real presence is not physically demonstrable what is putting a consecrated host in a monstrance and adoration all about?
 
Wannano said:
If the real presence is not physically demonstrable
Click to expand...
That seems fairly clear I would think.
It is a “miracle” of faith not of the senses just as the Church teaches.
 
Last edited:
Why would you think the real presence of Jesus is physically demonstrable?
I have never heard of a non-believer running out of Church shouting “God exists, God exists, I saw him.”

Yes I agree that it can be demonstrated that many people believe in the Real Presence of Jesus including myself. But how is that the same thing.
 
Last edited:
Sophie111 said:
Why would you think the real presence of Jesus is physically demonstrable?
I have never heard of a non-believer running out of Church shouting “God exists, God exists, I saw him.”

Yes I agree that it can be demonstrated that many people believe in the Real Presence of Jesus including myself. But how is that the same thing.
Click to expand...
I am sorry if I am mucking this up. No, I agree, you probably will never see a non-believer run out of church saying “God exists, I saw Him.” But I sincerely ask, isn’t that what you do as a believer, “God exists, I just ate Him”?
 
I guess you can either help me understand then or just brush me off.

Your own quote from post 44: “I am not yet convinced that charmed objects have real spiritual effects other than the psychosomatic ones that come from the ritual assertion by alleged authority that they do.”
 
He was demonstrating what they needed to do to be a good religious person…lead by example. Something we need more of in this life…both secular and religious.
 
Gorgias said:
Does it wash away sins? Or, does it merely demonstrate that the baptized wishes to repent?
Click to expand...
Acts 22:17. Then go back and see Mark 1:4-5 (repentance for remission of their sins, confessing their sins); Luke 3:3; John 3:3-15 (with Nicodemus; connect John 1:26,31,33 “therefore”, connect also to John 3:22-23, 4:1, with John and Jesus (through disciples) basically baptizing near one another); Romans 6:1-5; Titus 3:5; 1 Corinthians 6:11; Hebrews 10:22; 2 Peter 2:22.

A person who is baptized, such as when John was baptizing, does not merely “wish” to repent, but is actually of “repentance”, since they were obeying God to do so (by heeding the message sent through John), unlike the Pharisees, who refused the counsel of God against themselves being “not baptized” (by the way, is full bodily immersion in water in every single case in scripture; even the global Flood a like figure, as is stated, completely submerging the whole filthy world as Peter stated, and therefore, have you, by your own decision, with full belief, been fully immersed in water, if not, then beware of taking the same road as those in the days of John, for it is very dangerous that road).
 
EvangAlived said:
John recognized in Him
Click to expand...
John 1:
32 John also bore witness thus, I saw the Spirit coming down from heaven like a dove, and resting upon him.

33 Till then, I did not know him; but then I remembered what I had been told by the God who sent me to baptize with water. He told me, The man who will baptize with the Holy Spirit is the man on whom thou wilt see the Spirit come down and rest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top