Re: the highlighted...this is the problem with your understanding of Christian Baptism and interpretation of Scripture....Christ said in St.John 3:5 and St.Mark 16:16 that Baptism is necessary for salvation, and that's why He told His Apostles to go, teach and baptise all nations...Our Lord's command was to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and HS, as a sacred means of reconditioning our soul for salvation yet, you think that Baptism is symbolic. Is Baptism necessary as Christ said or symbolic as you say?

 Let's discuss this.

First point...You're focusing on the mode of Baptism, the immersion part....yet, it's not known conclusively that St.John baptized Christ by immersion in the Jordan River. I'll give you that it's likely because, for the most part although not exclusively, immersion was the mode of baptism among the Jews.  The Jewish Encyclopedia says the Levites were purified by having water of the sin-offering sprinkled upon them. Yet, the Gentiles to become a proselyte must immerse his whole body. It restored him to the purity of a new-born man. Whereas ritual purifications were by immersion in Lev. 11:36.

So, St.John's method of Baptism isn't really of any great importance to followers of Christ as he administered Jewish baptism not Christian baptism.

Second point...St.Paul wouldn't have administered the sacrament of Christian Baptism to his disciples, converts from Judaism who had been baptized by St. John, if there were not a vital difference between them. He said to the disciples in Ephesus,

"2 ....Have you received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? But they said to him: We have not so much as heard whether there be a Holy Ghost. 3 And he said: In what then were you baptized? Who said: In John's baptism. 4 Then Paul said: John baptized the people with the baptism of penance, saying: That they should believe in him who was to come after him, that is to say, in Jesus. 5 Having heard these things, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. " Acts. 19:2-5.

Think of the timing when St.John baptized Christ and it's significance to Jesus, 30 years old, was just starting out His public ministry appearing openly as the Messias....very, very important...St.John knew immediately that Christ had no need of a purification ritual of baptism as Christ was sinless. Jesus answered saying His baptism was necessary to fulfill the Law (just like Christian baptism is necessary to fulfill the command of Jesus). Jesus, being a Jew, was obedient to the ceremonial requirements of the Old Dispensation, (which the Council of Jerusalem declared no longer binding. The process by which St.John baptized is no more binding upon Christians than circumsion.).

Third point...So what was the significance of St.John's baptism of Christ because it sure wasn't that it was done by immersion?

Jesus willed to do the work of Redemption and in doing so He did everything God required of a good Isrealite. God called to St.John to baptize the Isrealites, thus preparing for the New Covenant. So, again the connection from the OLd COvenant to the New Covenant.....the significance is that it was a baptismal bridge from the Old Dispensation to the New one. This was inferred in St.John the Baptist's call upon the people to "prepare the way of the Lord" through the baptism of penance, as "the kingdom of God", the reign of Christ in His Church and in their individual souls was "at hand." St.Matt. 3.  

The Christian Sacrament of Baptism in the name of the Triune God as Christ commanded in St.Matt. 28:19, was revealed at the time Christ was being baptized...Heaven opened, the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove, a voice (of God the Father) exclaimed, "This is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." Here, the Eternal Father and the Holy Spirit give testimony that Jesus was the Son of God and the Redeemer of the world. 

Your concept of Catholics is so silly!

Protestants object to Purgatory, Limbo, etc. because they are not specifically mentioned in Scripture. But you are not consistent as the word "immersion"  or "immerse" is not found in any part of the Bible either!

Again, Baptism is all about God. It's about what Christ said and what He wants us to do. It's about following all His commands to the "T", for He said, "If you love Me follow My commands". It' not following the ones we pick and choose to (and yes, plenty of liberal Catholics do that..but woe to them!)

Our Lord's command was very clear....to go, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe (that is to obey) all that I have commanded you..." No mention was made as far as I know of whether the whole or part of the person was to be sprinkled, dipped or dunked.

"Follow Me" He said....and He instituted 7 Sacraments, the first being Baptism. His Blessed Virgin Mother Mary also gave us good advice...She said, "Do what He tells you." Protestantism came along and threw out the Seven Sacraments....If you don't believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation, then you are not trusting, following or believing in Christ...but someone else.

Catholics baptize infants because Christ told us to do so....

That infants were baptized by the Apostles is not specifically stated in Scripture as you rightly claim, however, it is clearly implied.

First, Christ commanded that we baptize all nations, which includes infants who are a valuable part of nations. Agree?

Remember, that Baptism makes infants adopted children of God, as circumcision made infants of the Old Dispensation children of the Covenant. If infants were brought into favor of God in the Old, why not in the New?  

Infants have souls, which are stained by Original Sin, the sin of Adam, which is washed away by the Sacrament of Baptism. Without this spiritual re-birth infants would be deprived of the supernatural grace necessary for the admission into the kingdom of Heaven as St.John says in 3:5.

Infant baptism has been practiced throughout the Christian ages...we have plenty of writings from the Didache on. The Apostles baptized whole families, Lydia, the seller of purple, Acts. 16:15; Crispus, 18:8 and Stephanus 1Cor. 1:16 are some BIblical recorded instances.

In Acts. 16:33, St.Paul is said to have baptized the "whole house" of his jailer. We are certainly within reason to believe that there were infants in those families and in that "house". And since St.Paul performed these Baptisms years before the Acts of the Apostles was even written it is evident that infant baptism was the will of GOd. And, the Catholic Church in her practice of baptizing infants ever follows the will of God. Christ's express command is to "Suffer the little children, and forbid them NOT to come to Me." St.Matt. 19:14.

It's plain that little children can come to Christ through Baptism and that the parents of these little ones have the duty to bring them to Chruch for Baptism in order that they may come to Christ. The irony of what the Baptist sect does by refusing to baptize infants and should they die, would deprive them of the joy of seeing God face to face, the Beatific Vision.

As a matter of history, the denial of infant Baptism was condemned by the Church as a heresy of the Pelagians more than 12 centuries before the Protestant sects separated themselves from Christ's Church.    

Why would any Christian parent deny infants and little children the blessed privilege of supernatural re-birth through Baptism?

KFC POSTS #308

Ay..yi..yi..yi..yi!  Baby Jesus wasn't born in the New Covenant Dispensation!

Jesus was born a Jew to a Jewish mother and Jewish foster father, St. Joseph...and even though Our Lord was without sin, and had no need of circumscion , He submitted Himself to it as they were under the Old Covenant and He wished to give us an example of obedience to the Law. And so, on the eighth day, Jesus was presented to the Temple and circumcised.

Also, according to the prophecies the Redeemer was to be a true Isrealite and son of Abraham. To be such and recognized as such, circumcision was necessary. Circumcision signified citizenship of the male child in the nation of GOd's chosen children, as the Sacrament of Baptism which displaced it signifies citizenship in the kingdom of God.  

Better think again on this....In saying this, Are you with Christ or against Him? Christ came to save mankind and He has the right to dictate the conditions of salvation. In St.John 3:5 and St.Mark 16:16 He distinctly commanded Baptism as a condition of salvation, and no arguments of you, or any one else, are of any avail against the authority of Christ.

Timing...think about timing and perfect order of things in salvation history. No one gets into Heaven with the stain of Original Sin on his soul. Baptism was instituted by Christ for the destruction of Original Sin.

Again, through an infusion of supernatural grace Baptism washes the stain of Original Sin from the soul. And the gates of Heaven were closed until Christ's Ascension into Heaven. Supernatural grace comes from the Holy Spirit as a result of Christ's Cross.  

What was going on in St.John 3:22-36 as far as Baptism is concerned? Wasn't there a discussion that arose over St.John the Baptist's Baptism, when Christ's public ministry was just getting underway? This is before Christian Baptism was ordained. Jesus didn't baptize becasue He wanted the disciples to practice exhorting people to conversion.  The baptismal rite referred to here was not yet the Christian Baptism---which only began after the Resurrection of Christ.

Then in St.John 4:2, Jesus delegated the baptizing to His disciples becasue He had work to do...later in this chapter He meets the Samarian woman at the well...and speaks to her of "living water". Doesn't that make you think...you who are so bugged about water-Baptism? She was converted.

We've got to take the entire section into context to understand why he said this. St.Paul was taking the Corinthians to task over divisions within the Chruch over certain teachers...he is there to stress unity in the Chruch. Again remember there is one faith, one baptism, one body, one Lord...etc. St.Paul tells them there is no excuse for divisions that unity is not dependent upon which teacher you had or who baptized you. Then he ties it all together...unity is based on Christ whom they all preach...Christ is the one who was crucified for everyone and His name is the name they were baptized in. It's through Baptism, the door of Christian life that Christians become part of the one body of Christ.

ok. I understand.   But there's coming a day when you will realize you've built your house on shifting sand.  It's like money (or fill in the blank).  Many people put their trust in money and can say the same as you just did.  "I've got peace of mind.  Money has helped me in my times of trouble.  I've been able to withstand much because of how much I have banked."  But now, with the recession, as in the past many times before, they've realized that money really doesn't bring peace of mind forever.  It's good while it lasts.  But again, it's just another lie out there. 

Think about all those who lost money because of the Madoff and other investment schemes out there.  Many people, like you, put their faith and peace of mind in themselves; in their decisions.  Now they're left holding the empty bag.  Now where does that leave them?   I think of the poor widow who gave her last two pennies.  Her peace of mind was in her Savior.  And God was watching over her as he saw her put her last two cents in the offering having nothing left over for herself. 

I absolutely agree.  But don't hitch true genuine Christianity to their wagon.   You know a tree by its fruit.  It matters not the denomination.  Sometimes tho, its just a matter of a Christian making a very bad mistake by reacting in the flesh instead of the spirit.  For instance, Peter.  He was with Christ for 3 1/2 years.  He knew Christ personally and was "saved" but he made a terrible mistake in denying Christ because he was just a human cloaked in human flesh.  He had a moment of weakness.  As Christians while we can't judge the heart of another we can inspect fruit.  There has to be some good fruit to show that this tree belongs to Christ.  With Peter there was.  He loved Christ but for a moment his faith faltered and when it did he resorted back into the fleshly mode and that always makes for bad mistakes. 

yes, but that's all you agreed to in that paragraph?  

Lula, I'll let you have the last word on baptism.  I told you I didn't want to (again) go into this subject with you. 

I strongly disagree from a biblical viewpoint what you are saying,  but I've said all that I can say.  I'm not going to belabor the point or argue this with you. 

Again, difficulty with the whole jesus, god, christian thing.  Not that there are no valid points and solid truths in that snippet.

Admittedly it is a bit of a fallacy to base my views of of those people, because an X number of people does not equal the masses. Still, the track records are sketchy. That being said, I don't go around crucifying Christians or other religious folks - it's just not my thing.

Perhaps. With the trust in myself there will be the ups and downs, that is life. Still, I've been able to get through the low of lows and survived. So, it's all good.

~Alderic

ok.  Let me ask you.  Have you ever read the whole bible?  Just sat down and read the whole thing?  Even from a historical  POV it's pretty interesting.  I don't mean snippits here and there but just sat down and read the whole book? 

well that's good although I didn't think you did.  But again, it depends on what sources you're using.  There are enough stories on both sides of the fence.  Read the others for a change, the stories of genuine Christians who put their lives at risk at the expense of others. 

there's valley and mountaintop experiences no matter who you put your trust in.  We, Christians, have ups and downs as well.  The difference is when we go thru those down times, we find ourselves drawing even closer to Christ as we turn to him to help us thru.  During those dark times is when we feel his presence the most.  We have someone to cry out to and he ALWAYS comes thru for us.  Always.  It's pretty cool to hear all the stories that surround these times from believers. 

If you can, get that "Foxes Book of Martyrs" classic book.  It's pretty interesting. There's no way a mere human can rely on themselves during these hard times without losing it. 

so far.  Maybe that's why they say there are no atheists in foxholes?  Sounds like you haven't been in any foxholes yet. 

I have actually, as I have with other religious texts. I would much rather be an educated man than a foolishly ignorant one.

Yeah, not my cup of tea. I will take a look - any suggestions?

Perhaps, but I'm skeptical. It seems to me to be a misconception/myth because not all will. There's also the fact that it seems to advertise faith/religion as merely a crutch.

~Alderic

I don't know why I didn't suggest the link before, but it might help explain where I stand. My "belief," so to speak - would be along the lines of this:

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/religion/blrel_theism_ideal.htm

Though not that the values take the place of a God, there's the absence of a higher power as well as worship.

KFC,

Earlier you said that we agree on essentials...and yet our discussion reveals that Baptism is one essential upon which we disagree.

nothing wrong with being skeptical.  I tend to be most times myself.  I'm not into easy believism.  This whole "crutch" analogy is very old tho, I have to say. 

The fact of the matter is we all need a crutch to get by in this world.  We all are crippled in some sense and deep inside there is a desire for something to sustain us.  The question is "is this crutch we call Christianity true or is it on the same level as say drugs or alcohol"? 

There are certain psychological needs...... fear of danger, disease or death that might prompt us to invent God so we can feel better just as drugs and alcohol make others "feel" better. But don't think you're off the hook as an atheist.  There are also psychological needs that might lead you to deny that God exists.  The atheist may be using his atheism as a crutch to avoid the responsibility of God's demands. 

If God is who he says he is, all powerful, all knowing, holy and just and will someday judge us all, it is only fair to pont out that some people need the crutch of denying God's existence in order to live their lves as they please without the fear of judgment.  Correct? 

Aldous Huxley, a most famous atheist manifested this thought in "Ends and Means,"  "For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political." 

So the question begs to be asked here.  Does mankind need to lean on Him or can we lean on something else?  Jesus answered it this way:

"Therefore whosoever hears these sayings of Mine and does them, I will liken him to a wise man which built his house upon a rock.  And the rain descended and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded upon a rock (Christ). 

And every one that hears these sayings of Mine and does them not shall be likened to a foolish man which built his house upon the sand.  And the rain descended and the floods came and the winds blew, and beat upon that hous; and it fell and great was the fall of it."  Matthew 7:24-27

Christianity in one sense is a crutch.  But it is more than a crutch.  It is the sure foundation and the truth of life.  It's like a light bulb saying to an electrical socket "you are my crutch."  A light bulb can only function properly when inserted into the correct socket.  So too, we have been created to function properly in a right relationship with a personal God who created us for a purpose.  

the whole name of the game from the get go, is to displace God from his throne.  So whatever it takes to do this works fine.  I checked out your site...am familiar with the site.  I do agree with the article title that not all gods are personal gods.  To me, honestly, tho it's just a bunch of gobblygook with no substance behind it.  It's obvious they are trying to explain this world sans God and it's very hard to believe.  That's why the saying goes it actually takes more faith to be an atheist than a Christian. 

I guess for me I'd have to ask....why isn't it a nice thing to know there is a personal God who cares and loves you but also created you for a pupose?  Isn't it nice to think we're not here just for naught?  What gods of this earth can answer the questions.....why are we here?  What is our purpose in life?  Where are we going when we are finished? 

I believe there is one true personal God who created all that we see but there are many gods in this world.  These gods, are false gods and can be anything that attempts to fill the void in our hearts and minds that was meant for the one and only God of the universe.  The war has always been for the minds and hearts of men.  Jesus called Satan, the "god of this world."  Satan is a usurper.  His goal is to convince people that there is no god; that they can rely on self and that in all reality we can be our own gods.  That was what the whole story was about with Eve.  He tempted her the same way he does us.  It's an old trick but it works well. 

We can make gods of anything, intellectualism, drugs, money, position, power, materialism, work etc.  Some take the time we should put aside for God and fill it with ___________________ (fill in the blank). 

water baptism is NOT an essential.  The thief on the cross bears this out. 

post #305

post #309

Although there were times when my faith was very weak, I always believed in God. I think belief in God goes directly as to how a person answers life's bigger questions such as....Why me? Why am I here? and Where am I going?

Some think that evidence of God must be seen or touched, but this is not necessarily so. We all have reason and intelligence and appreciate intellectual evidence. Even apart from the Holy Bible, reason can detect sufficient evidence to guarantee the existence of God.  

Why me?

The end of a thing is the purpose for which it was made. The end of a clock is to keep time and the end of a pen is to write. For what purpose was mankind made and if we discover that we'll know his end. Look around, everything has a purpose (except maybe mosquitos!) or an end. The soil is made for plants to grow for animals and for us to feed upon and from this we can easily see that everything in the world  was made to serve something else.  

What was I made for...anything in the world?  The answer is NO.

We see all classes or beings were created for something higher than themselves. Plants are higher than soil because they have life and soil does not. Animals are higher than plants because they have life and can feel and plants cannot. Man is higher than animals because he has reason and intelligence and can understand, while animals cannot.

There must be something higher than man himself but there is nothing higher than him in the world so we must look beyond to find that for which he was made. And looking beyond and considering all things, we find man was made for Almighty God..to know Him, to love Him and serve Him happily in this life and eternally happy in the next. 

If there were no God, there would be no one....no me, no you to dispute or question His existence.