I thought we were all in agreement that Christians are commanded to be baptized. I may not agree about the spiritual significance in everyway, but I agree that to be a Christian you must be baptized if for no other reason than because it is an issue of obedience, and 1 John is all about salvation and obedience. The other beliefs are secondary, because ultimately we don't know (exactly) what takes place.

I also thought this thread was about infant baptism. Can we get back to this? I want to hear what is wrong with my interpretation of the Acts passage.

Acts 22:16: And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.'

Baptism not only is an initiation rite into Christianity, but it also washes away your sins !

Then how did the non-baptized thief get into heaven?

now come the back-flips

A) You don't know that the thief wasn't baptized.

B) Even if he were, that was before the resurrection and under the old covenant and Jesus' command to his disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

You lost me at A.

How many people and how much water does it take for somebody to be correctly saved by Almighty God?

Because it became necessary WHEN Jesus died.

Also, I read your previous long post. I agree the scriptures say the Holy Spirit came upon them prior to baptism. I don't agree that they were saved prior to this moment. The Holy Spirit came upon them for a unique purpose -- to declare that these unclean people, Gentiles, were deemed worthy for salvation by God. Then Peter, in recognition of such, called for them to be baptized that they might receive that salvation.

Just read my initial post....it would have been nice if their had been substantial argument against the arguments I put up.

The thief on the cross and why it is not the smoking gun exception...

so the thief on the cross becomes moot, and atheists in foxholes might as well stay that way.

priests and water are required for salvation and babies are baptized to get them halfway there.

gotcha

Texas velvet maestro,

You are better than that man.

Seamaster
I agree with your original post. I would not be re-baptised no matter what any church wanted becuase I would see it as a denial of God's grace in my life both from my first baptism and in my on going sanctification. My parents and my Church raised me and instructed me in faith and I could not deny that gift that god has given me. JMO

One question. Does this mean that according to the Catholic Church a person can go to heaven without baptism?

1259 For catechumens who die before their Baptism, their explicit desire to receive it, together with repentance for their sins, and charity, assures them the salvation that they were not able to receive through the sacrament.






[This message has been edited by austagg99 (edited 2/18/2009 9:15p).]

You are better than that man.
********

and Luke 23:43 is a lot more than a "smoking gun."
I'd call your characterization of that verse, along with the hindsight "research" that attempts to render that brand of saving grace obsolete, an all time low in denominational apologetics, almost mormonesque. fitting the scripture to a particular church's agenda.

that said, I think well of you and appreciate your many intelligent contributions to this forum.

TVM,

Pointing out that the thief on the cross did not die after the resurrection isn't bad apologetics.

The apostles even baptized people who had only been baptized in John's baptism AFTER pentecost because it was not the same baptism. The thief on the cross simply doesn't factor into this conversation based on this alone.

However, according to the Church, those that cannot be baptized (like the thief) can be saved by Jesus too so what is the problem?

quote:

---

priests and water are required for salvation and babies are baptized to get them halfway there.

---

This sentence is what I was referring to in my prior post. Its ridiculous. I never said anything about priests (anybody can baptize not just priests and I never said that baptism for infants gets them 'half way' there. It gets them all the way there if they day as infants or if they live their lives cooperating with the good work that was begun in them.


[This message has been edited by Seamaster (edited 2/18/2009 10:13p).]

quote:

---

an all time low in denominational apologetics, almost mormonesque. fitting the scripture to a particular church's agenda.

---

Are you sure you want to go there TVM? After reading numeous posts on this thread that's pretty much the pot calling the kettle covered with carbon.

SM,

If a baby is baptized as an infant and then shows no fealty to Christ for the remainder of his life what are we to think of the power of infant baptism?

What occurred during the baptism of an infant who renounces Christ as Lord at a later stage in life and decides obedience to Christ is a complete sham anyway?

You have still not responded to my interpretation of the Acts passage you describe in your opening post.

Finally, when the bible talks about the baptism that saves, is it talking about the water immersion, or being baptized in the Holy Spirit?

Romans 6:1-7

quote:

---

1What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

5If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. 6For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

---

To those who don't believe in original sin, have you considered the preceding passage, Romans 5:12-21

quote:

---

12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

15But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.

18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

20The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

---

SM if nothing else, I hope you can appreciate that I deliberately post lots of scripture because I can't stand cherry picking.

herewegoagain.

I don't think that posting one or two verses is cherry picking. If I, or anybody else, just posts one verse then everybody is free to go look at the context.

One of my favorite passages that reflects baptismal regeneration is John 3. And I usually just say "John 3" as in...the whole chapter. I try not to post huge passages in full because I've learned that people have short attention spans.

quote:

---

If a baby is baptized as an infant and then shows no fealty to Christ for the remainder of his life what are we to think of the power of infant baptism?

---

Baptism alone isn't what saves you. I linked the Church's catechism on baptism previously but people complained that it was too long (kind of proves my point about attention spans.) Let me highlight some parts that answer your question.

quote:

---

1254 For all the baptized, children or adults, faith must grow after Baptism. For this reason the Church celebrates each year at the Easter Vigil the renewal of baptismal promises. Preparation for Baptism leads only to the threshold of new life. Baptism is the source of that new life in Christ from which the entire Christian life springs forth.

1274 The Holy Spirit has marked us with the seal of the Lord ("Dominicus character" "for the day of redemption."85 "Baptism indeed is the seal of eternal life."86 The faithful Christian who has "kept the seal" until the end, remaining faithful to the demands of his Baptism, will be able to depart this life "marked with the sign of faith,"87 with his baptismal faith, in expectation of the blessed vision of God - the consummation of faith - and in the hope of resurrection.

---

Hmm, so baptism is necessary to get to heaven, but at the same time, it isn't. If it sometimes isn't, then how can it be?

You say, well they wanted to, so there's a "baptism" of desire. Well when did the thief on the cross tell Jesus that he really wished he could be baptized?

I still am curious as to what y'all say to the question I posed earlier.

If baptism was essential to getting into heaven, then why would the Bible mention many times that belief is all that is necessary? Why wouldn't they go ahead and ALWAYS include baptism?

Like I said, when they talk about getting to heaven, only one thing is constant in every example: faith. Baptism is sometimes listed (and always, by the way, listed AFTER believing), but not always. The only constant is faith.

quote:

---

Hmm, so baptism is necessary to get to heaven, but at the same time, it isn't. If it sometimes isn't, then how can it be?

---

watty, from a Catholic standpoint, we believe that at baptism you are filled with God's grace. It is all the grace you will ever need, but it is not the only thing you need to get to heaven. Baptism is also the promise of your parents to raise you within the Church's teachings. We also go through Confirmation, which is the sacrament of renewing your baptismal promises made for you by your parents and confirming them to be of your will now. So, through Confirmation, we believe, the Holy Spirit is stirred within you and it is now your responsibility to keep that faith through good works.

You cannot simply say that someone will go straight to Heaven because they have been baptized, I think we all can agree on that.

The RCC is built on Sacred Scripture and Tradition as we were told to do. In your literal interpretation of the bible you might find a part where Jesus said to Peter, "Upon this rock, I will build my Church."

quote:

---

Matthew 16: 13-19

13 And Jesus came into the region of Cesarea Philippi: and he asked his disciples: who do people say that the Son of man is?
14 But they said: Some John the Baptist, some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 Jesus said to them: But who do you say I am?
16 Simon Peter answered and said: You are Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed are you, Simon son of Jona, because flesh and blood have not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
18 And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

---

Right there, the RCC is established and Jesus commands us to follow the traditions set forth by Peter.

BTW, don't take this as me saying you are wrong in your beliefs. I, myself, believe that we are all serving the same Lord. And following his life and example to the best of our abilities. We are all called to do God's Will, if we believe we are doing His will, then how can we be wrong? And who am I to question you about doing His will?

Wolfe, I don't believe baptism reflects a filling of God's grace, that is something that's available for every believer after salvation; it especially can't be true for an infant who can't make that choice of salvation for themselves and then follow it with a choice to be baptized. That has to come from a personal admission of guilt through an understanding of ones own sinfulness.

________________________________________________________

Preventing teen pregnacy by handing out condoms is like preventing murder by handing out bullet-proof vest!

That's fine, I didn't ask you to believe it. You aren't Catholic obviously, so why would you believe Catholic teachings?

Catholics believe you receive God's grace at baptism, what you do with it from there is your free will.

Wolfe, that's right and I meant no offense to you or the Catholic Church. However, based on what I've read in Scripture, I can't find any basis for what you previously wrote. Now you did quote that portion of Scripture where Jesus says to Peter "upon this rock, I will build my church", could Jesus have been referring to the truth as a rock (that is, he was the Christ, the Son of God) not a person (Peter)?


________________________________________________________

Preventing teen pregnacy by handing out condoms is like preventing murder by handing out bullet-proof vest!

[This message has been edited by bleed maroon ag (edited 2/19/2009 11:33a).]

quote:

---

The RCC is built on Sacred Scripture and Tradition as we were told to do

---

quote:

---

18 And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

---

Peter was told whatever he binds on earth will be bound in Heaven. Since, I believe the Pope is blessed by a direct line from Peter and the RCC was built by Peter and the Apostles, I believe Traditions are just as important as Scripture. It's not like the RCC is just pulling this stuff out of nowhere all the time. Traditions are all based on interpretations of Scripture. They may not always be litereal interpretations all the time, but anyone who has read the Bible, knows that Jesus was usually a man that spoke in parables for the people of the time to understand. So, in reading, we have to interpret a bit. Just nature of the Scripture itself.

quote:

---

I believe Traditions are just as important as Scripture.

---

This is my main beef with Catholics I suppose.

And don't even get me started on the whole idea of the Pope, or their view of Mary. Another thread for another day, I know....

I agree Watty (with all you said); maybe we should save that for another thread. Wolfe, wasn't the traditions of men what Jesus condemned the pharisees for the most and was the main reason they couldn't accept Jesus because he didn't fit there traditional views? All I'm saying is that it was this kind of devotion to tradition that blinded the men of that time from recognizing who Jesus was and what he came to do! They couldn't accept the new covenant because it didn't fit the old one.

________________________________________________________

Preventing teen pregnacy by handing out condoms is like preventing murder by handing out bullet-proof vest!

[This message has been edited by bleed maroon ag (edited 2/19/2009 12:11p).]

So y'all agree that the RCC was created by that passage wolfe05 posted?

I will agree that this is a topic of another thread. But, FYI, our traditions are all based on scripture and interpretation. So, I don't understand where your point is.

As far as the Pope and Mary, I think you owe it to yourself to find answers to your questions, not just meander around in circles that will bash on Catholics for their beliefs and tell you what you want to hear. That's not research. If you take the information and don't agree with it, you likely will not because you don't want to, then make your own conclusions.

Why do you assume I haven't done that?

So Wolfe, you're saying that the pharisees and the like weren't basing their traditions (for example: offerings, sacrifices, keeping the Sabbath Day holy, etc.) on Scripture? Weren't these traditions handed down from Moses? My point is doing something merely because it's a tradition doesn't make it right or pleasing to God.

________________________________________________________

Preventing teen pregnacy by handing out condoms is like preventing murder by handing out bullet-proof vest!

[This message has been edited by bleed maroon ag (edited 2/19/2009 1:27p).]

quote:

---

So Wolfe, you're saying that the pharisees and the like weren't basing there traditions (for example: offerings, sacrifices, keeping the Sabbath Day holy, etc.) on Scripture? Weren't these traditions handed down from Moses?

---

Are you saying that Jesus did not come and give us new scripture and guides to live our life by?

Those traditions were signs of the first covenant and Jesus is the new everlasting covenant until he comes again. Traditions based on Him and His life must be worth something.

watty: I would love to hear what came of your research and why you have a beef with Mary and the Pope. But, like you said, not for this thread.

We are already back off the topic of infant baptism...

watty,

Are you purposefully ignoring the fact that the thief on the cross died before the resurrection?

To your other question...Mark 16:16 - Jesus said "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved."

Of course not Wolfe, new wine won't go into old wineskin! What I'm saying is the traditions you said were of the Catholic Church and based on Scripture was why you practiced and supported rituals like infant baptism for example. My point is that the pharisees of Jesus' day believed in their traditions with as much conviction as you! I'm not comparing you or Catholics with the pharisees, just understand the dangers of doing something just because it's tradition. I can honestly say that's one of the greatest benefits of worshiping God at a non-denominational church, no traditions of man to muddy the waters.

________________________________________________________

Preventing teen pregnacy by handing out condoms is like preventing murder by handing out bullet-proof vest!

[This message has been edited by bleed maroon ag (edited 2/19/2009 1:54p).]

quote:

---

My point is that the pharisees of Jesus' day believed in their traditions with as much conviction as you!

---

And the Anabaptist tradition isn't a 'tradition?'

Are you referring to 'Believer's Baptism'? If that's the case, no, I don't believe that's a tradition since that's what the New Testament teaches.

________________________________________________________

Preventing teen pregnacy by handing out condoms is like preventing murder by handing out bullet-proof vest!