What do Baptists and Catholics have in common?

[lori4dogs]

Here is what I'm parroting:

John 3:5
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

In Mark 16:16 Jesus says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;(I guess you think that should not be there, but it is) but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The Apostle Peter explained what happens at baptism when he said, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). But he did not restrict this teaching to adults. He added, "For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." (Acts 2:39).

1 Peter 3:21
"....whereunto even baptism doth also now save us, (not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

From the beginning of New Testament Christianity at the Feast of Pentecost (Acts 2: 38-39) to our time, unbroken and uninterrupted; the church has baptized babies. Entire households (Jewish, proselytes and Gentiles) were baptized by Christ’s original 12 Apostles (I Corinthians 1: 16; Acts 11: 14, 16: 15, 33, 18: 8) and that practice has continued with each generation.

 

[Trotter]

From the beginning of New Testament Christianity at the Feast of Pentecost (Acts 2: 38-39) to our time, unbroken and uninterrupted; the church has baptized babies. Entire households (Jewish, proselytes and Gentiles) were baptized by Christ’s original 12 Apostles (I Corinthians 1: 16; Acts 11: 14, 16: 15, 33, 18: 8) and that practice has continued with each generation.

You are so confused it ain't funny. Do you ever think for yourself? Or do you just take what your papist priest and catholic websites feed you?

There is no evidence whatsoever that babies were ever baptized in the NT. Trying to stretch "entire households" won't cut it, as baptism without salvation is just making someone wet. And yet you continue to try to press the point that Rome's "interpretation" (I use that term very loosely, very loosely indeed) is completely and utterly correct. Hogwash! Pry your lips from the Pope's ring and open your eyes and see what is really there and not the smoke and mirrors being performed for you.

Baptism has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. It is an act of obedience, not a second half of being saved.

And I thought cats were hard headed...

 

[DHK]

Here is what I'm parroting:

John 3:5
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

I have given you a detailed answer how this cannot refer to baptism.
You had no answer for it.
Here it is:
http://baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1525669&postcount=258

In Mark 16:16 Jesus says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;(I guess you think that should not be there, but it is) but he that believeth not shall be damned."

And he that believeth and (is not baptized) shall be damned. It doesn't say that.

Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

I have given you a detailed answer to this one also.
Compare to Mat.3:11
Does repentance come first or baptism.
Did not John say bring forth fruits fit for repentance. He demanded the fruit of repentance before baptism. Baptism did not bring repentance.
Neither does baptism bring forgiveness of sins. The same Greek word and Greek construction is used in both statements; the word "eis".
The statement means "be baptized "because of the remission of sins" or on account of your sins having been forgiven. Baptism cannot forgive anyone's sins. Only Jesus forgives sins. To think that water forgives sins is absurd.

The Apostle Peter explained what happens at baptism when he said, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38).

Are you dull of hearing. I just explained it.

But he did not restrict this teaching to adults. He added, "For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." (Acts 2:39).

That is the promise of receiving the Holy Spirit which has nothing to do with baptism. It is the promise of salvation which has nothing to do with baptism.

1 Peter 3:21
"....whereunto even baptism doth also now save us, (not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

--Take a good look at that verse.
First you missed out the first few words "In like manner", indicating that it is a figure of speech, and referring back to a few verses earlier in the chapter. Convenient to take Scripture out of context isn't it?
What was in like manner referring to? It was referring to Noah and his salvation. What was he saved from and was it spiritual. His salvation was physical. He was saved from the waters of the flood, as he saw millions of dead corpses floating around him. He was safe in the ark, and the ark was Jesus.
We are immersed (the definition of baptism) in this world. And the stain of the world is not going to be removed as long as we are in this world. Thus--not a removal of dirt from the body. But rather an appeal to God for a clear conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. That is what saves. It is faith in Christ, not baptism or immersion in this world.

From the beginning of New Testament Christianity at the Feast of Pentecost (Acts 2: 38-39) to our time, unbroken and uninterrupted; the church has baptized babies. Entire households (Jewish, proselytes and Gentiles) were baptized by Christ’s original 12 Apostles (I Corinthians 1: 16; Acts 11: 14, 16: 15, 33, 18: 8) and that practice has continued with each generation.

Yes and they all drove corvettes and ate chocolate ice cream too.
If you can prove that infants were baptized, I can prove that they drove corvettes. Care to take up the challenge?

 

[lori4dogs]

You are so confused it ain't funny. Do you ever think for yourself? Or do you just take what your papist priest and catholic websites feed you?

There is no evidence whatsoever that babies were ever baptized in the NT. Trying to stretch "entire households" won't cut it, as baptism without salvation is just making someone wet. And yet you continue to try to press the point that Rome's "interpretation" (I use that term very loosely, very loosely indeed) is completely and utterly correct. Hogwash! Pry your lips from the Pope's ring and open your eyes and see what is really there and not the smoke and mirrors being performed for you.

Baptism has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. It is an act of obedience, not a second half of being saved.

And I thought cats were hard headed...

I haven't kissed the Pope's ring even once this week!

I don't buy your interpretation of scripture. It is an invention of the Reformers. BTW, it is not only Rome's interpretation but most of the rest of Christianity.

 

[DHK]

I haven't kissed the Pope's ring even once this week!

I don't buy your interpretation of scripture. It is an invention of the Reformers. BTW, it is not only Rome's interpretation but most of the rest of Christianity.

To say it is an invention of the reformers is a lie. This is what it does.

1. It shows that you are incapable of expounding the Word of God when presented to you.
2. It shows that you are incapable of mounting any kind of Biblical refutation whatsoever.
3. It shows that you simply parrot the RCC line and can't think for yourself.

Surely, you can do better than that.

 

[Marcia]

It will be a couple of days before I have a chance to look at any commentaries other than on line commentaries. However, I did check a couple of them. Thomas Constable has a problem with it because he speculates it may have one of two different connotations. First he suggests it is telling us to work on the sanctification thing. Then he suggests it might be a corporate admonition to the church, not to be taken personally. I also checked Matthew Henry, whose explanation is not too far from my own concept of this verse. .

Matthew Henry believes this means we must be righteous on our own merits to get into heaven? I looked at what he says and it appears to me he is using salvation in the sense of sanctification, which is how every evangelical I know interprets this. Salvation in a general sense encompasses justification, sanctification, and glorification and can refer to any or all of these depending on context.

I agree there is nothing in the verse that is difficult, but you must think so because you try to make it mean something it does not say.

I am right in what I said about the fear and trembling connected to the previous verses.

8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
10so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
12So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;
13for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Look at the "So then," in verse 12. What is written in 12 and 13 is based on what is said previously. It's like a "therefore." You cannot read 12 and 13 without connecting them to the previous statements. Because of Christ empyting Himself, humbling himself in the form of man, etc. we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling -- we are to keep in mind the great price paid by Jesus Christ in order to save us. This should put fear and trembling. It is to keep us humble, which is one of the main themes of this whole chapter.

It we want to maintain our salvation we must work to do so. We can't know for sure until we die and reach the other side. Frankly, I think there is merit and strong scriptural support for the Catholic model, which is if you die with unforgiven mortal sin you go to Hell.

So if we can't know if we are saved, then what does it mean when several verses in the Bible say that we can know now we are saved, and now we have eternal life?

but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life." John 4:14

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." John 5:24

"and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand." John 10:28

And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 1 John 5:11

These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 John 5:13

Are you still Baptist? Why? Your views are not Baptist at all.

 

[lori4dogs]

To say it is an invention of the reformers is a lie. This is what it does.

1. It shows that you are incapable of expounding the Word of God when presented to you.
2. It shows that you are incapable of mounting any kind of Biblical refutation whatsoever.
3. It shows that you simply parrot the RCC line and can't think for yourself.

Surely, you can do better than that.

Show me that there is a succession of your belief from the time of the Apostles.
Surely you can do that.

I believe the bible. I don't spin these passages. They are clear.

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be BAPTIZED, AND WASH AWAY THY SINS, calling on the name of the Lord.

Acts 2:38-39 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and BE BAPTIZED EVERY ONE OF YOU IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is unto you, AND TO YOUR CHILDREN, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.

Mark 16:16 He that BELIEVETH AND IS BAPTIZED shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

1 Cor. 12:12-13. 12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Colossians 2:11-13 - 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in PUTTING OFF THE BODY OF THE SINS of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 BURIED WITH HIM IN BAPTISM, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Romans 6:3-4. 3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Galatians 3:26-27. 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have BEEN BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST HAVE PUT ON CHRIST.

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by THE WASHING OF REGENERATION, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

 

[DHK]

Show me that there is a succession of your belief from the time of the Apostles.
Surely you can do that.

I believe the bible. I don't spin these passages. They are clear.

You are like a J.W. When you can't answer one question then you will avoid it and go to another topic or counter with another question.
For example I gave you a clear concise explanation of John 3:5.
The only answer you can come back with is: That is not the RCC meaning of it. Pitiful!

I have shown you time and time again how baptism denies one cardinal doctrine after another, yet you have not taken the time to refute it.

I even gave you a simple challenge: Demonstrate infants being baptized from the Bible and if you can I will demonstrate that the Apostles drove corvettes. Not up for that one either are you? Of course you can't prove either. Thus infant baptism is bogus, unbiblical, anti-biblical, heretical, and is part of a message that sends people to hell.

 

[Trotter]

Show me that there is a succession of your belief from the time of the Apostles.

My belief comes from Jesus Himself. I don't need anyone to carry it for me, or for some "succession" of one confused individual to another to hand down to me what has been completely confused and disconnected from what it originated from.

I believe the bible. I don't spin these passages. They are clear.

No, you believe the RCC. You are completely ignorant of the bible.

 

[Matt Black]

There is no evidence whatsoever that babies were ever baptized in the NT.

*Cough* Yes there is *Cough*. St Paul here draws a direct parallel between circumcision (Old Covenant) and baptism (New Covenant).Now, remind me, how old were boys when they were circumcised?

 

[Matt Black]

My belief comes from Jesus Himself.

Really?! So Jesus has appeared to you personally in the flesh and taught you for three years? Wow!

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

*Cough* Yes there is *Cough*. St Paul here draws a direct parallel between circumcision (Old Covenant) and baptism (New Covenant).Now, remind me, how old were boys when they were circumcised?

Wasn't it after they reached an "age of decision"??

 

[Matt Black]

Only if you count eight days old as being the 'age of decision'...

 

[Trotter]

*Cough* Yes there is *Cough*. St Paul here draws a direct parallel between circumcision (Old Covenant) and baptism (New Covenant).Now, remind me, how old were boys when they were circumcised?

Allow me... "not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ". That's not the eighth day circumcision as that is the one done by hands. The circumcision done by Christ, the putting off of the sinful nature, has nothing to do with infants. Nice try, though.

Really?! So Jesus has appeared to you personally in the flesh and taught you for three years? Wow!

Getting your material from third graders? I take my doctrine and beliefs from what Jesus and the NT have to say, not from what has been mangled and added to by man for several hundred years.

 

[lori4dogs]

Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized.." Baptists use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But, I'm told, the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Baptists argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.

 

[Matt Black]

Allow me... "not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ". That's not the eighth day circumcision as that is the one done by hands.

The two are parallel though; one is for the Old Covenant, the other for the New.

The circumcision done by Christ, the putting off of the sinful nature, has nothing to do with infants.

Scripture would disagree with you there; read it for itself rather than through the lenses of your Baptist tradition.

Getting your material from third graders?

No, just trying to get you to clarify what you're saying.

I take my doctrine and beliefs from what Jesus and the NT have to say,

Ah, so now the NT figures too. What about the OT?

not from what has been mangled and added to by man for several hundred years.

No mangling or adding done, just correct interpretation. Surely you can't disagree with a proper interpretation of all the Scriptures?

 

[lori4dogs]

You are so confused it ain't funny. Do you ever think for yourself? Or do you just take what your papist priest and catholic websites feed you?

There is no evidence whatsoever that babies were ever baptized in the NT. Trying to stretch "entire households" won't cut it, as baptism without salvation is just making someone wet. And yet you continue to try to press the point that Rome's "interpretation" (I use that term very loosely, very loosely indeed) is completely and utterly correct. Hogwash! Pry your lips from the Pope's ring and open your eyes and see what is really there and not the smoke and mirrors being performed for you.

Baptism has no bearing on salvation whatsoever. It is an act of obedience, not a second half of being saved.

And I thought cats were hard headed...

Not a stretch at all to conclude that 'whole household' would include infants and children.

Acts 16:33 - Paul baptized the jailer (an adult) and his entire household (which had to include children). Baptism is never limited to adults and those of the age of reason. See also Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 1 Cor. 1:16; and 1 Tim. 3:12; Gen. 31:41; 36:6; 41:51; Joshua 24:15; 2 Sam. 7:11, 1 Chron. 10:6 which shows “oikos” generally includes children.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Not a stretch at all to conclude that 'whole household' would include infants and children.

Acts 16:33 - Paul baptized the jailer (an adult) and his entire household (which had to include children). Baptism is never limited to adults and those of the age of reason. See also Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 1 Cor. 1:16; and 1 Tim. 3:12; Gen. 31:41; 36:6; 41:51; Joshua 24:15; 2 Sam. 7:11, 1 Chron. 10:6 which shows “oikos” generally includes children.

Whole household also includes slaves and their children. What of a slave that didn't want to be baptised but must since their master commanded it?

 

[Matt Black]

Same with all Abraham's household in Gen 17:23 - the parallels are striking.

 

[Marcia]

Whole household also includes slaves and their children. What of a slave that didn't want to be baptised but must since their master commanded it?

Since the only examples in the NT are people who say they believe who are baptized, that is what we go by. We don't assume anything in this matter; there is not a shred of clear evidence that infants were baptized or that people were forced to be baptized. The spread of the gospel did go to households where servants believed as well.