Water Baptism, is that ENOUGH?

[Imagican]

Scot,

And herein lies the difficulty for many to accept what 'some Catholics' would have them 'believe'. For MANY indicate that the 'confession' IS what MATTERS. Yet as can CLEARLY be seen in my example: there can be LITTLE 'true repentance' in one that would offer the SAME confession OVER AND OVER AND OVER........................ For IF there were TRUE repentance, at ONE point, he who TRULY LOVES GOD and His Son WOULD ask for and RECEIVE the STRENGTH to 'overcome' such behavior.

As has been offered over and over again on this topic: 'there are those that state that being 'born again' is nothing other than a 'sprinkling of water' or 'emersion'. This MAY be a 'start' for some, but it is that which brings about a 'change in Spirit' that IS able to transform. Is 'water' TRULY ABLE to 'transform' the Spirit? Maybe, for some. But the indication in Word and experience is that SELDOM is this even CLOSE to the case. Perhaps a 'beginning work' for some, but nothing other than a 'traditional ACT' for MOST. For MANY that have participated in the 'water' CONTINUE in their sins WITHOUT repentance.

This was my POINT in the question that I asked. I think you have answered it as well as can be answered. Faith without WORKS is DEAD. And confession or baptism WITHOUT true REPENTANCE can mean NO MORE than what IT PRODUCES.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[stranger]

Scot,

And herein lies the difficulty for many to accept what 'some Catholics' would have them 'believe'. For MANY indicate that the 'confession' IS what MATTERS. Yet as can CLEARLY be seen in my example: there can be LITTLE 'true repentance' in one that would offer the SAME confession OVER AND OVER AND OVER........................ For IF there were TRUE repentance, at ONE point, he who TRULY LOVES GOD and His Son WOULD ask for and RECEIVE the STRENGTH to 'overcome' such behavior.

As has been offered over and over again on this topic: 'there are those that state that being 'born again' is nothing other than a 'sprinkling of water' or 'emersion'. This MAY be a 'start' for some, but it is that which brings about a 'change in Spirit' that IS able to transform. Is 'water' TRULY ABLE to 'transform' the Spirit? Maybe, for some. But the indication in Word and experience is that SELDOM is this even CLOSE to the case. Perhaps a 'beginning work' for some, but nothing other than a 'traditional ACT' for MOST. For MANY that have participated in the 'water' CONTINUE in their sins WITHOUT repentance.

This was my POINT in the question that I asked. I think you have answered it as well as can be answered. Faith without WORKS is DEAD. And confession or baptism WITHOUT true REPENTANCE can mean NO MORE than what IT PRODUCES.

Blessings,

MEC

Hi MEC,

There are a couple of points I would like to add to the present discussion. I appreciate that the tread is about water baptism - but when the vicous cycle of sin is mentioned - sin' repentance/ the same sin repeated/ repentance/ . . . the underlying problem is original sin. So there are two levels of operating in unison.

The other point I picked up on was 'transform'. With the 'flesh and Spirit' the flesh may be transformed into Dr Jerkyll (a respectable and even good doctor), but he will revert back into Mr Hyde and in time totally dominate the personality.

I agree that faith without works is dead.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

....confession or baptism WITHOUT true REPENTANCE can mean NO MORE than what IT PRODUCES.....

As I have said, baptism, among other things, is the entrance into the family of God. Now, if you were to adopt a kid, he would be your child legally. But that is no guarantee that he won't grow up to be a hoodlum and totally disrespect your family. But none the less, he would STILL legally be your child. That is one - just one - of the reasons why babies are baptised. They become adopted sons of the Father. This has nothing to do whatsoever with what kind of Christian they will turn out to be. Get it?

 

[Imagican]

Yes, CC, I DO 'get it'. And perhaps there is 'something' to be understood of what you offer. I have already openly admitted that 'water Baptism' could 'very well' BE a 'first step' in the direction of Salvation. I don't BELIEVE that it ALWAYS IS however. Especially IF one is Baptized under a 'false perception'.

It's THIS SIMPLE really. What IF the Son that one Baptizing in the 'name of' was SUN instead of Son. What if the Father that one Baptized in the 'name of' was a DIFFERENT Father than the Father of Jesus. What IF someone was DELIBERATELY DECEIVING those that they Baptized and did so for the PURPOSE of 'duping them' OUT of a 'possible TRUE relationship' with God through His Son?

I know, I know,,,,,,,,,,,, NOT POSSIBLE, right? But I have a pretty dog-on GOOD 'feeling' that IT IS possible and is actually BEING performed. That Satan IS the Father of LIES. That Satan IS able to 'transform himself' INTO an 'angel of light', (so far as APPEARANCE is concerned). That Satan IS able to offer the 'warm fuzzies' that so MANY IN THE FLESH desire. And that he HAS many that 'work for and THROUGH him' in his QUEST to gain as MANY souls as POSSIBLE. And that his POWER increases the MORE he is ABLE to GAIN. So MUCH SO that 'in the end', he WILL own MOST of the souls on this planet, (practically ALL of them).

But back to the basics: CAN we 'agree' that water Baptism is NOT, (key word), ENOUGH? That even IF it is SO, it is ONLY a 'first step' in our walk IN truth? That 'water Baptism' ALONE is NOT able to 'save one's soul'?

Or do we continue to EVADE the ACTUAL question in favor of rhetorical conversation?

MEC

 

[Scott1]

But back to the basics: CAN we 'agree' that water Baptism is NOT, (key word), ENOUGH? That even IF it is SO, it is ONLY a 'first step' in our walk IN truth? That 'water Baptism' ALONE is NOT able to 'save one's soul'?

One of the basic principles in Sacramental Theology is called "ex opere operato":
"... (T)he sacraments act ex opere operato (literally: "by the very fact of the action's being performed"), i.e., by virtue of the saving work of Christ, accomplished once for all. It follows that "the sacrament is not wrought by the righteousness of either the celebrant or the recipient, but by the power of God." From the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister. Nevertheless, the fruits of the sacraments also depend on the disposition of the one who receives them.
CCC# 1128

The key line that I believe you are looking for is the last one.... the sacrament only "works" if the person who receives the sacrament WANTS it to work and cooperates with the grace of God offered to them. The sacraments are not God's way through the Church to create mindless robots.... our free will is always paramount.... but we as a church community offer these sacraments to strengthen the receipients and it is up to them to bear fruit.

In other words.... I think we both agree. :-D

 

[Imagican]

Yes indeed. You have offered the clarification in but a 'few words'. That is EXACTLY what I have been attempting to make clear throughout this entire thread.

Thanks again for your open and honest offering that goes BEYOND denominational rhetoric. Truth is the basis for ANY pertinent understanding. And ONCE we are ABLE to 'come to the truth', then there is LITTLE that is ABLE to differ in one's understanding other than the DEGREE to which each is offered.

MEC

 

[Alabaster]

Baptism by immersion is only for one who already believes. We are sealed into the life of Christ as His disciples as we announce to the world publically that we belong to Jesus Christ. The ritual does not save, only faith in Jesus Christ, coupled with repentance for our sin saves us. It is, however the first step of obedience in one's walk with Jesus.

 

[Scott1]

Baptism by immersion is only for one who already believes. We are sealed into the life of Christ as His disciples as we announce to the world publically that we belong to Jesus Christ. The ritual does not save, only faith in Jesus Christ, coupled with repentance for our sin saves us. It is, however the first step of obedience in one's walk with Jesus.

SWEET FANCY MOSES! WE AGREE! :o

This is a sure sign of the Apocalypse!

 

[Oracle]

Water Baptism is an outward show of ones faith, it has nothing to do with salvation. EG the thief on the cross was never baptized, but was in paradise with Jesus simply for believing who he was.

Mark 16:16; 'He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned'. Sorry to disappoint you, but Jesus Christ, the author of salvation says baptism has everything to do with salvation, just as believing does .

1 Peter 3:21; 'The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ'. The scriptures are very clear that water baptism is an integral part of salvation. If you want a clear conscience towards God, get baptized.

Acts 2:37-40; 'Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
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.
40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation'.

When ask what should be done for salvation, Peter said to repent, be baptized, and receive the Holy Ghost. Water baptism on its own will not save. Repentance (which is a change, or reversal in thinking), and receiving the Holy Ghost are equally important. All getting baptized without repentance towards God will achieve is get you wet.

Matthew 3:11; 'I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire'. John the Baptist spoke of water baptism as being a sign of repentance, but also spoke of the need to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost, which was to come after the death of Christ.

John 3:5-8; '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.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit'.

Being born of water is water baptism as described Romans 6:4. Being born of the Spirit is the baptism of the Holy Ghost, evidenced in scripture by speaking in tongues (Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44-48, Acts 19:1-7). Unless you receive both, you cannot see, or enter into the kingdom of God.

As for the thief on the cross, he died under the Old Testament, as the New Testament was not sealed until the day of Pentecost, fifty days after Jesus spoke those words to him. Besides that, Jesus never promised him salvation, only that on that very day, he will be with Jesus in paradise (which means a park or garden). We know from the scriptures that Jesus remained in the grave three days and three nights, so the paradise that Jesus said he will be in that day could not have been heaven. Whether the thief will be saved or not come judgment day (when all the dead, both small and great have to stand before God), is not up to you or me to deside. It is up to God alone.

Unlike the thief who died before New Testament salvation was available, we are living in the times of the New Testament. We cannot use the thief as an excuse for disobeying God.

 

[dadof10]

Baptism by immersion is only for one who already believes. We are sealed into the life of Christ as His disciples as we announce to the world publically that we belong to Jesus Christ. The ritual does not save, only faith in Jesus Christ, coupled with repentance for our sin saves us. It is, however the first step of obedience in one's walk with Jesus.

SWEET FANCY MOSES! WE AGREE! :o

This is a sure sign of the Apocalypse!

Scott,

Maybe I missed something in a previous post. Could you please clarify your position?

1) Baptism by immersion is only for one who already believes.

Does this mean you don't think infant baptism can "save", or that immersion is only for adults, but sprinkling is for infants?

2) We are sealed into the life of Christ as His disciples as we announce to the world publically that we belong to Jesus Christ.

Does infant baptism seal us "into the life of Christ"?

3) The ritual does not save, only faith in Jesus Christ, coupled with repentance for our sin saves us.

Baptism does not actually save?

Thanks in advance.

Mark

 

[Rick W]

I think a pastor of a church I used to attend summed up infant baptism pretty well.

Wasn't so much for the baby as it was to unite the parents in their responsibilty to rear the child in the Lord.

 

[Imagican]

But HOW MUCH of this 'ritual' ACTUALL DOES ANYTHING?

We have been offered that circumcision means NOTHING in and of itself. We have been offered that ADHERANCE through OBLIGATION means NOTHING.

We have been SHOWN that Baptism THROUGH The Spirit is HOW we COME to the TRUTH. Attempting to use water to wash off TAR is NO different than a 'belief' that sprinkling or dunking can 'wash away sin'. Our battle is NOT PHYSICAL folks.

We have been TOLD that the battle that wages is with principalities and powers that are BEYOND this 'physical world'. And UNLESS we are ABLE to come to a Spiritual renewing, we are DOOMED to the FLESH.

The TEMPLE is 'within'. This is NOT A PHYSICAL PLACE so far as our limited understanding is ABLE to comprehend. ONLY when we BECOME Spiritual IN NATURE are we EVEN ABLE to BEGIN to UNDERSTAND TRUTH.

ALL that physical ritual is ABLE to DO is OUTWARDLY, (physically), show an INDICATION. For there are MANY that pratice such rituals that have NO LIGHT IN THEM WHATSOEVER. A PURE indication that the 'rituals' themselves mean LITTLE and at times NOTHING AT ALL.

Now, I ask this: IF physical Baptism is SO important, what is the ACTUAL 'proceedure' that it MUST follow in order to 'cleanse'? I mean, I have been to NUMEROUS churches of different denominations and EACH seems to have it's OWN 'ritual'. Now, IF this is ALL IMPORTANT in 'being born again', SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ME; which PROCEEDURE is the 'correct one'? And understand this: once you OFFER such, then that is a statement that all others are WRONG.

Water Baptism is NOTHING other than a 'statement of faith'. To some it is TRUE, to others it is NOT true. So the ACT in and of itself is UNABLE to DO 'anything'. If it WERE able, then I could take a demon possesed individual and AGAINST their WILL, dunk them under water and mumble some words and THEY WOULD BE SAVED. I don't think ANYONE would make such a BOGUS statement.

And in the SAME respect, infant Baptism MAY offer some kind of solace to the parents, but does NOTHING for the child other than 'get their face wet'.

MEC

 

[Scott1]

Mark,

Maybe I missed something in a previous post. Could you please clarify your position?
1) Baptism by immersion is only for one who already believes.

Sorry... I didn't cut the quote off properly. Using either form of baptism (immersion or sprinkling) is not really important... either way is fine.

Does infant baptism seal us "into the life of Christ"?

The two principal effects of baptism are purification from sins and new birth in the Holy Spirit.... "The Holy Spirit has marked us with the seal of the Lord ("Dominicus character") "for the day of redemption."(CCC#1274)

Baptism does not actually save?

On its own? No.

... but it is possible that one can be saved without baptism.

Hope that answers your questions.
S

 

[dadof10]

The two principal effects of baptism are purification from sins and new birth in the Holy Spirit.... "The Holy Spirit has marked us with the seal of the Lord ("Dominicus character") "for the day of redemption."(CCC#1274)

So, when we are baptized (presumably, either as infants or adults) we are purified from sins and given a new birth in the Holy Spirit, yet not saved? The above is a pretty good definition of the word "saved".

Granted, we can go on through our life and commit sin and reject the salvation given to us in Baptism, but do you believe that at the moment of our Baptism we are in a real sense saved?

 

[Scott1]

So, when we are baptized (presumably, either as infants or adults) we are purified from sins and given a new birth in the Holy Spirit, yet not saved? The above is a pretty good definition of the word "saved".

Granted, we can go on through our life and commit sin and reject the salvation given to us in Baptism, but do you believe that at the moment of our Baptism we are in a real sense saved?

Sorry.... I don't know what your definition of "saved" is... the typical Protestant usage of the word is problematic to me.... so I don't use it.

.... but I can tell you that I believe:

By Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as all punishment for sin. In those who have been reborn nothing remains that would impede their entry into the Kingdom of God, neither Adam's sin, nor personal sin, nor the consequences of sin, the gravest of which is separation from God.
CCC #1263
... if that means "saved" to you, then we agree.... if not... please clarify.

 

[dadof10]

So, when we are baptized (presumably, either as infants or adults) we are purified from sins and given a new birth in the Holy Spirit, yet not saved? The above is a pretty good definition of the word "saved".

Granted, we can go on through our life and commit sin and reject the salvation given to us in Baptism, but do you believe that at the moment of our Baptism we are in a real sense saved?

Sorry.... I don't know what your definition of "saved" is... the typical Protestant usage of the word is problematic to me.... so I don't use it.

.... but I can tell you that I believe:

By Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as all punishment for sin. In those who have been reborn nothing remains that would impede their entry into the Kingdom of God, neither Adam's sin, nor personal sin, nor the consequences of sin, the gravest of which is separation from God.
CCC #1263
... if that means "saved" to you, then we agree.... if not... please clarify.

I agree completely with the Catechism. I was confused when you agreed with Alabaster's statement:

"Baptism by immersion is only for one who already believes. We are sealed into the life of Christ as His disciples as we announce to the world publically that we belong to Jesus Christ. The ritual does not save, only faith in Jesus Christ, coupled with repentance for our sin saves us. It is, however the first step of obedience in one's walk with Jesus."

The two statements you "agree" with seem to contradict...unless I'm missing something (wouldn't be the first time :D )

typical Protestant usage of the word is problematic to me.... so I don't use it.

If you can pin them down to ONE definition.

 

[Scott1]

Mark,

I mentioned before that I did not cut the quote properly.... what I meant to say was that I was in agreement with was the last part of the quote:

The ritual does not save, only faith in Jesus Christ, coupled with repentance for our sin saves us. It is, however the first step of obedience in one's walk with Jesus."

If you can pin them down to ONE definition.

Hehe.... sad but true.

Peace be with you.

 

[dadof10]

Water Baptism is NOTHING other than a 'statement of faith'.

Can you show me where the Bible gives this definition of Baptism?

 

[Imagican]

I can show you that physical circumcision is NOTHING in and of itself. I can show you the parallel between circumcision and Baptism. I can show you that even john the Baptist states that HE Baptized with WATER but Him that would come AFTER would Baptise with The Holy Ghost and fire. I can SHOW you ALL these things, but if you SO WISH to continue in a 'belief' that is contradictory to such, none of what I have to offer will mean ANYTHING anymore than you are WILLING to accept it.

One question for YOU to answer to YOURSELF and YOU TOO will be ABLE to discern the validity of 'water Baptism'.

Can I HOLD YOU DOWN and Baptise you AGAINST your will? Will it have ANY effect other than to make you 'wet'? Herein lies the answer to the question of; Water Baptism, is that ENOUGH. Answer the question HONESTLY to 'yourself' and you HAVE the answer to the topic. No need to offer me ANY kind of response, for I ALREADY KNOW the answer.

And then to reassure yourself of the validity of what I offer, READ the NT and take NOTES of EVERYTHING that you read concerning 'water Baptism' and 'Baptism of the Spirit'. Once you have adequately DONE THIS, you WILL have a 'complete' understanding of the topic. And I am relatively SURE that ONCE you have followed my suggestion here, that YOU TOO will understand that 'water Baptism' IS a mere; Statement of Faith. And EVEN THIS STATEMENT is NOT able to SAVE. It is ONLY able to 'tell others' what it represents. It takes Baptism of The Spirit to even BEGIN to offer an UNDERSTANDING of what it TAKES to BE 'saved'.

Salvation IS a 'gift'. One CANNOT 'take it'. It MUST be 'given'. But there ARE stipulations as to WHO will be OFFERED this 'gift' and who will ACTUALLY ACCEPT IT through their FAITH. And I don't MEAN simply BELIEVING what one will concerning the validity of ANYTHING. I mean the ACTUAL faith that ONE FOLLOWS, NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

MEC

 

[dadof10]

I can show you.... I mean the ACTUAL faith that ONE FOLLOWS, NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

MEC

So then, no, you can't show me where Scripture says baptism is merely a "statement of faith".

Thanks.

Can I HOLD YOU DOWN and Baptise you AGAINST your will? Will it have ANY effect other than to make you 'wet'?

Well, the answer to that question is....wait a minute...

No need to offer me ANY kind of response, for I ALREADY KNOW the answer.

Oops, I forgot I was dealing with a doctrinal expert.