Marymog
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2017
- 11,959
- 1,796
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
confused What? Lol....You are an interesting person Truther!!
What is the purpose of infant baptism?
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You cannot baptize in the name of Jesus without saying the name of Jesus. You can’t do any works or deeds in the name of Jesus, without saying the name of Jesus.
Taken
Well-Known Member
Read your posts.
I leave that for others on this thread to judge.
As far as I'm concerned YOU'RE POISON FOR THE CC.
And I stand by my statements.
YES. You have absorbed his attitude, which is abhorent.
And YES, I will not engage Catholics who do not know how to be either
CIVIL
or
RESPECTFUL toward others.
I believe Jesus spoke a lot about how we're to TREAT OTHERS.
You could check out His Two Great Commandments and it's not even necessary
to go any further than that.
You and @BreadOfLife need to learn how to be
CIVIL
and
RESPECTFUL toward others.
My statements are not false.
Because YOU do not agree with a statement does not make that statement false.
It is also very disengenuous of both of you to call those who do not agree with you LIARS.
This would get you IMMEDIATELY permanently banned on other forums.
Apparently neither you nor Bread know what it means to LIE.
So, I choose to not discuss with you.
It's nice that I crack you up.
YOU don't crack me up.
At the expense of turning persons totally off to the Catholic faith,
you continually scold and make fun of them and call them liars.
So, apparently, you care more about the TEACHINGS of the CC --- some of which are WRONG....
than to attempt to explain Catholicism to our Protestant brothers.
BTW, If you read paragraph 1271 of the CCC, you'll find that THEY ARE BROTHERS.
Continue as you are....
I'm sure God is very happy with you.
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 21,665
- 3,593
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
You are absolutely correct about that - you are NOT a Protestamnt.
First of all - Protestants are Christians, Baptized as JESUS commanded in Matt. 28:19. Christians believe in the Triune Godhead, as the Bible teaches
(Gen. 1:26, Matt. 28:19, John 15:26, 1 Cor. 12:4-6, 2 Cor. 13:14, 1 John 5:7, Eph. 4:6, Psalm 68:5, Mal. 2:10, Isa. 63:16, 2 Cor. 1:3-4, John 3:16, John 8:41, 1 Thess. 3:13, Isa. 7:14, Isa. 9:6, John 1:1, John 1:3, John 8:58, John 10:30, John 15:9, John 20:28, Acts 5:3-4, 2 Cor. 4:4, Phil. 2:6, Col. 2:9, 1 Tim. 3:16, Heb. 1:8, Tit. 2:13, John 14:16-18, Luke 12:10, 2 Cor. 3:17, 2 Cor. 13:5, John 14:23, Acts 5:3-4).
You are a FALE Teacher, as warned about by Jesus -
Matt. 7:15-20
“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Think you are in the wrong dispensation--
THE OLD MAN DEAD AND BURIED.
“HOW SHALL WE THAT ARE DEAD TO SIN, LIVE ANY LONGER THEREIN? KNOW YE NOT, THAT SO MANY OF US AS WERE BAPTIZED INTO JESUS CHRIST WERE BAPTIZED INTO HIS DEATH? 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.” Romans 6:2 to 4.
From these verses, Romans 6:2 to 4, certain immersionists teach that water baptism should be a burial under water (although they admit that Christ was buried above the ground). According to Romans 6:6, the believer’s old man was crucified when Christ received His death baptism. Luke 12:47 to 51. To witness to the world that his old man was crucified, the believer should be immersed and thereby show that he has also been buried.
It is a known fact that nothing will arouse the immersionists’ old man more than to question his peculiar theory of a watery grave, which was his witness that his old man was dead. Every believer is dead to sin and raised to walk in newness of life and seated in the heavenlies With Christ the moment he receives Christ in salvation, without water baptism of any kind. How can he be dead and raised without being buried? The baptism into death and the burial baptism of Romans 6:2 to 4 is both meritorious and efficacious and produces the change in the believer. If it is water, then water is essential to salvation. Nearly all immersionists, who read water into Romans 6, become religious judges, judging saved Presbyterians, saved Lutherans and all other believers who repudiate their fanciful interpretation and reject their water theory. Every sprinkled saved Lutheran, Presbyterian and Methodist has been buried by baptism with Christ. Colossians 2:12. To read “water” into Colossians 2:12 is unsound exegesis.
HOUSEHOLD IMMERSIONISTS.
“MOREOVER, BRETHREN, I WOULD NOT THAT YE SHOULD BE IGNORANT, HOW THAT ALL OUR FATHERS WERE UNDER THE CLOUD, AND ALL PASSED THROUGH THE SEA; AND WERE ALL BAPTIZED UNTO MOSES IN THE CLOUD AND IN THE SEA.” I Corinthians 10:1 and 2.
“NOW THESE THINGS WERE OUR EXAMPLES, TO THE INTENT WE SHOULD NOT LUST AFTER EVIL THINGS AS THEY ALSO LUSTED. I Corinthians 10:6.
Undoubtedly there were thousands of little children who crossed the Red Sea with their parents, about 1492 B.C. Read Exodus 14:29: “The children of Israel walked upon DRY land in the midst of the sea”. These household immersionists should drain the water out of their baptisteries. Here then we have another fanciful theory; and that is, that believers’ babies should be immersed because of I Corinthians 10:6, quoted above. But the “wherefore” of I Corinthians 10:12 is the key to the argument.
The children of Israel were baptized unto Moses by two great miracles, but in spite of other supernatural Divine tokens, Israel yielded to temptation. By the miracle of regeneration, by a Divine baptism not made with hands, we were joined to Christ. We should be careful about stumbling, remembering the experience of Israel in the wilderness. Some religious leader started this water theory and some splendid servants of the Lord followed their teaching; and thus another tradition; and little infants are immersed in bath tubs.
It is needless to say that these household immersionists are “water heretics” in the judgment of other immersionists who contend for “believer’s” baptism. These two opposing factions have brought much grief into the ranks of the Plymouth Brethren, who are strong on the water. Both factions believe that the Body of Christ began on the day of Pentecost; but they offer no explanation as to why they do not preach the water message and practice the order of Acts 2:38, Acts 8:5 to 15 and Acts 19:1 to 7. But all must acknowledge that during the “Acts” period households received water baptism. Acts 10:48 and Acts 11:14, Acts 16:15, Acts 16:33, I Corinthians 1:16. We may argue until we leave this world and dogmatically and Pharisaically contend for our water theories; but we cannot Scripturally prove that there were not some small children in some of those households. Neither can we prove by one single Scripture that sprinkling took the place of circumcision.
Thus we learn that all baptism ceremonies have been adopted, not by careful study of the Scriptures, but by the traditions of church fathers.
In the midst of such confusion, and with all the “big” Bible-teachers in disagreement, I am more and more inclined to believe that we are taught, by Ephesians 4:3 to 7 and Ephesians 3:8 and 9, that water has no place in the dispensation of the mystery;” only the one Divine baptism.
Water Heretics
I think I can convince you that Christians of every group with respect to water baptism, are heretics, in the judgment of some other Christians. Last Sunday morning (May 17th, 1936) a friend placed in my hand a leaflet, entitled “Water-Water-Water.” The message was written by a very sincere relig
bereanbiblesociety.org
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 21,665
- 3,593
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Then YOU should stop being dishonest and misrepresentiing Catholic doctrine and practice.
You are a hypocrite who goes around spewing falsehoods then yoiu become "indignant" when you get CAUGHT . . . .
Ironically, 'tithe' is not mentioned in the New Testament at all, but only the false denomination teaches and practice them. Even robbing some of them of all their savings, and since these are grace period, GOD is still allowing repentance. The ones who were cheated and lost everything, they will be compensated, probably now or in their after life.
'Tithe' is a letter in the Law of Moses, and the Law and the Prophets have been fulfilled by Christ, proclaiming in His last breath, "It's accomplished."
And Apostle Paul, His 'instrument', proclaimed to the church that the Law to them is 'abolished'. Also, to who practices even to one letter of the Law, are required to practice the whole Law. And when to the least in the Law is broken, one has broken the whole law and under curse.
The term Paul uses for 'offering' in the New Testament church is, 'generous giving' and 'cheerful giving'. As he was proposing and collecting from the churches these offerings, to provide for churches that are lacking in finance.
And for the record, churches or believers are not to acquire nor receive any financial offering from unbelievers. (3John1:6-8)
Shalom in the name of Jesus Christ
Last edited:
Hi, something is not fully right here in testimony.
The Son have His own identity cum name, as in the beginning was, 'The Word', and then took on flesh became, 'Jesus of Nazareth'.
The FATHER have HIS own identity cum name, and until now the pronunciation is not accurate.
The Holy Spirit have His own identity without a name, and Jesus who is not them, refers to both of them as, 'He'
Apparently, Jesus in person only bare the 'image' of the 'invisible FATHER' who art in Heaven and in secret. Like the earthly son of man, who bare the image of his own biological father.
And too Jesus bare the power of the Holy Ghost, and when He speak the power of the Holy Ghost performs.
No, you got that all wrong, a protestant is defined as someone who protests Peter per Acts 2:38. Your RCC church is the mother of all protestants. You are the very first organization to protest Acts 2:38 and end it. The rest of your protestant daughters follow you like lemmings.
Get that right.
The disciples that baptized by immersion in the name of Jesus in the book of Acts were water heretics. Great, just great.Think you are in the wrong dispensation--
THE OLD MAN DEAD AND BURIED.
“HOW SHALL WE THAT ARE DEAD TO SIN, LIVE ANY LONGER THEREIN? KNOW YE NOT, THAT SO MANY OF US AS WERE BAPTIZED INTO JESUS CHRIST WERE BAPTIZED INTO HIS DEATH? 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.” Romans 6:2 to 4.
From these verses, Romans 6:2 to 4, certain immersionists teach that water baptism should be a burial under water (although they admit that Christ was buried above the ground). According to Romans 6:6, the believer’s old man was crucified when Christ received His death baptism. Luke 12:47 to 51. To witness to the world that his old man was crucified, the believer should be immersed and thereby show that he has also been buried.
It is a known fact that nothing will arouse the immersionists’ old man more than to question his peculiar theory of a watery grave, which was his witness that his old man was dead. Every believer is dead to sin and raised to walk in newness of life and seated in the heavenlies With Christ the moment he receives Christ in salvation, without water baptism of any kind. How can he be dead and raised without being buried? The baptism into death and the burial baptism of Romans 6:2 to 4 is both meritorious and efficacious and produces the change in the believer. If it is water, then water is essential to salvation. Nearly all immersionists, who read water into Romans 6, become religious judges, judging saved Presbyterians, saved Lutherans and all other believers who repudiate their fanciful interpretation and reject their water theory. Every sprinkled saved Lutheran, Presbyterian and Methodist has been buried by baptism with Christ. Colossians 2:12. To read “water” into Colossians 2:12 is unsound exegesis.
HOUSEHOLD IMMERSIONISTS.
“MOREOVER, BRETHREN, I WOULD NOT THAT YE SHOULD BE IGNORANT, HOW THAT ALL OUR FATHERS WERE UNDER THE CLOUD, AND ALL PASSED THROUGH THE SEA; AND WERE ALL BAPTIZED UNTO MOSES IN THE CLOUD AND IN THE SEA.” I Corinthians 10:1 and 2.
“NOW THESE THINGS WERE OUR EXAMPLES, TO THE INTENT WE SHOULD NOT LUST AFTER EVIL THINGS AS THEY ALSO LUSTED. I Corinthians 10:6.
Undoubtedly there were thousands of little children who crossed the Red Sea with their parents, about 1492 B.C. Read Exodus 14:29: “The children of Israel walked upon DRY land in the midst of the sea”. These household immersionists should drain the water out of their baptisteries. Here then we have another fanciful theory; and that is, that believers’ babies should be immersed because of I Corinthians 10:6, quoted above. But the “wherefore” of I Corinthians 10:12 is the key to the argument.
The children of Israel were baptized unto Moses by two great miracles, but in spite of other supernatural Divine tokens, Israel yielded to temptation. By the miracle of regeneration, by a Divine baptism not made with hands, we were joined to Christ. We should be careful about stumbling, remembering the experience of Israel in the wilderness. Some religious leader started this water theory and some splendid servants of the Lord followed their teaching; and thus another tradition; and little infants are immersed in bath tubs.
It is needless to say that these household immersionists are “water heretics” in the judgment of other immersionists who contend for “believer’s” baptism. These two opposing factions have brought much grief into the ranks of the Plymouth Brethren, who are strong on the water. Both factions believe that the Body of Christ began on the day of Pentecost; but they offer no explanation as to why they do not preach the water message and practice the order of Acts 2:38, Acts 8:5 to 15 and Acts 19:1 to 7. But all must acknowledge that during the “Acts” period households received water baptism. Acts 10:48 and Acts 11:14, Acts 16:15, Acts 16:33, I Corinthians 1:16. We may argue until we leave this world and dogmatically and Pharisaically contend for our water theories; but we cannot Scripturally prove that there were not some small children in some of those households. Neither can we prove by one single Scripture that sprinkling took the place of circumcision.
Thus we learn that all baptism ceremonies have been adopted, not by careful study of the Scriptures, but by the traditions of church fathers.
In the midst of such confusion, and with all the “big” Bible-teachers in disagreement, I am more and more inclined to believe that we are taught, by Ephesians 4:3 to 7 and Ephesians 3:8 and 9, that water has no place in the dispensation of the mystery;” only the one Divine baptism.
Water Heretics
I think I can convince you that Christians of every group with respect to water baptism, are heretics, in the judgment of some other Christians. Last Sunday morning (May 17th, 1936) a friend placed in my hand a leaflet, entitled “Water-Water-Water.” The message was written by a very sincere relig
I think the tithe doctrine is the greatest stumbling block that the churches have put in the path of sinners. People that are poor that attempt to be saved may decline and do decline. When I met with the pastor to be baptized in 1979. He told me I had to agree to tithing. I was making minimum wage at the time. Those were tough years. I almost did not get baptized over it. It was weird. God coached me into getting baptized anyway.
This is just easy. All of this thinking and rethinking and rethinking is causing people to not be baptized in the name of Jesus. Peter said to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. That is how we get remission of sins. There should be no argument there at all.
The name of the son per Matthew 28:19 is Jesus. Jesus said to baptize in the name of the son, which is Jesus. People that choose not to be baptized in the name of of the son, Jesus, are less than ignorant.
Jesus said to His disciple, to baptize them in the name of the FATHER, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, not in the name of the Son alone.
Jude Thaddeus
Active Member
Peter wasn't baptizing anyone when he said this. So he wasn't violating Matthew 28:19 the way you do. The Epistles are to be read in the light of the Gospels. You have it backwards
You refuse to admit you are a Modalist. Modalism is a 2nd century heresy that went nowhere. It was refuted as early as 325 A.D. At the council of Nicaea, that proved the Church has always been trinitarian. You reject that too.
If you and your splinter group, that started in 1915, want to believe a "Jesus only" baptism, you should keep it to yourself, and stop trying to correct 99.99999% of all Christendom. You haven't got a scriptural or historical leg to stand on. Your group has invented a false doctrine based on extreme literalism over one verse. I think it's nothing short of PRIDE that makes you so unreasonable and difficult.
I'm not saying you are a bad Christian, just grossly misinformed, totally convinced your offshoot of an offshoot of a splinter group is infallible over an extreme literalist viewpoint over one verse, and everyone else for 2000 years has it wrong. You cannot see the absurdity of your position, because you must be right no matter what.
A mild correction, if you will permit it: Modern versions of Matthew's gospel report that Jesus said to His disciple, to baptize them in the name of the FATHER, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, not in the name of the Son alone.
Whether the verse was in the original or was a later addition is uncertain.
Then why don’t you baptize in the actual name of the father, and of the son, and of the Holy Ghost?
Why don’t you say their names?
Don’t you get what you guys are doing? You’re just repeating Jesus like a parrot instead of doing what he commanded you to do.
Did Peter violate Matthew 28:19 or did he fulfill it when he commanded sinners to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins and not mentioning Father or Holy Ghost in water baptism?
Did any of the disciples in the book of Acts violate Matthew 28:19 since not a single one of them mentioned Father or Holy Ghost in their baptismal formula?
@Jude said this…
Peter wasn't baptizing anyone when he said this. So he wasn't violating Matthew 28:19 the way you do.
Jude, you said Peter violated Jesus’s command.
When Jesus gave Peter the keys in Matthew 16, was Peter unqualified and did Jesus make a mistake there too?
Peter wasn't baptizing anyone when he said this. So he wasn't violating Matthew 28:19 the way you do.
Jude, you said Peter violated Jesus’s command.
When Jesus gave Peter the keys in Matthew 16, was Peter unqualified and did Jesus make a mistake there too?
You refuse to admit you are a Modalist. Modalism is a 2nd century heresy that went nowhere. It was refuted as early as 325 A.D. At the council of Nicaea, that proved the Church has always been trinitarian. You reject that too.
A modalist is someone who believes that God became a man. Even trinitarians practice modalism. They think that God took on flesh or became a human of some type. Oneness and Trinity both teach it at different degrees. I don’t believe God became a man. I believe he created a man and fully indwells that man. Jesus said it over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. People do not believe a word he said about that.
A modalist is someone who believes that God became a man. Even trinitarians practice modalism. They think that God took on flesh or became a human of some type. Oneness and Trinity both teach it at different degrees. I don’t believe God became a man. I believe he created a man and fully indwells that man. Jesus said it over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. People do not believe a word he said about that.
Similar threads
