David Lamb
Active Member
As far as the bible is concerned, yes. Nowhere in the epistles are we told about apostolic succession.
Infant Baptism is not given in scripture.
- Thread starter Hobie
- 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!
bdavidc
Active Member
According to the Bible, baptism is always connected to personal faith, repentance, and belief in the gospel, none of which infants are capable of. In every instance where baptism is described, it follows a conscious response to the message of salvation. Acts 2:38 says, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” Repentance is a command directed at those who can understand their sin and turn to God, something an infant cannot do.
Acts 8:36, 37 records the Ethiopian eunuch saying, “What doth hinder me to be baptized?” and Philip replied, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” He answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” That is the biblical pattern, belief first, then baptism. Baptism is described as the answer of a good conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21), which again requires awareness and faith.
Jesus did love children and said the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as them (Matthew 19:14), but He never baptized children or instructed that they be baptized. He blessed them, He welcomed them, and He used them as examples of humble faith, but He never replaced belief with ceremony. Nowhere in the Bible is an infant baptized, and nowhere is baptism disconnected from belief.
The temple events in Jesus’ childhood, the prophecy over Him, and His zeal at age twelve are not examples of baptism but of fulfillment of the law and divine calling. Baptism is for those who hear the Word, believe it, repent, and respond in obedience. That is the plain teaching of Scripture.
Baptism of infants has developed along side of “ Purgatory for little babies as well in the Roman Catholic Faith System
this has been debated since St Augustine in the 4th century.
Today ✁ Catholics are guided to dispel and remove the term " LIMBO " before this can be discussed . The reason is because the afterlife, fate and eternal destiny of “ un - baptized babies “
not baptized into Roman Catholicism
their fate after death has been something that The Catholic scholars are still debating and developing.
◉ Do babies who were not Roman Catholic - that haven not been sprinkled with holy water carry the original sin
◉ Will these babies who die be accepted in heaven and will these innocent beings, be sent to eternal hell fire.
Upon the Vatican Website
Vatican website states that - - St. Augustine's thoughts, theories and doctrines regarding the fate of “ un - baptized babies “ / infants were brought up or revived in the 16th century .....
(Paul III, Benedict XIV and also Clement XIII) defended and upheld the right of Catholics to teach Augustine's views theories and doctrines regarding babies dying under original sin who
“ un - baptized babies “ ( these babies ) are condemned and to punished with the eternal torment of the fire in hell BUT the baby would only suffer forever in eternity feeling a very, very mild pain,
not too hot ..... for the baby was was not a Roman Catholic.
St. Augustine elaborated on the pain that the baby would feel as he detailed - comparing the baby who was not Roman Catholic with the pain that was suffered by adults who were punished for their mortal sins.
in conclusion of the matter, in 1794 ) - Pius VI pronounced that it is perfectly fine to teach that babies who died with the guilt of original sin are punished but only punishment of " complete lack of the Beatific Vision " called
( “ punishment of loss ” ) - but not sensible pains not - (the punishment of "fire").
Pius VI resolved this matter " In the bull “Auctorem Fidei” (1794)
" the Pope condemned the teaching that places babies into hell fire and flames and pain who have not baptized and whose sins are only the sin of " ORIGINAL SIN " today the Vatican teaches that the punishment was not the same punishment of the condemned who will burn in eternal flames - punishment of fire.... the eventual fate of the “ un - baptized baby “ a baby who is not catholic, their final destination / judgment day determination / judgment and eventual fate after purgatory has punished them enough will be based upon God's mercy.
and this is not called Limbo any longer, - In Catholic Faith babies will suffer in purgatory but after being purified by suffering a loss as - (“punishment of loss”), - but not sensible pains
they will then be judged by God and God may choose to release the baby from its punishment in purgatory,
The question i ask - is the baby being punished for not being born into a Roman Catholic family ?
is not the blood of Jesus Christ sufficient to cleanse a newborn infant who has no condemnation nor guilt ?
this has been debated since St Augustine in the 4th century.
Today ✁ Catholics are guided to dispel and remove the term " LIMBO " before this can be discussed . The reason is because the afterlife, fate and eternal destiny of “ un - baptized babies “
not baptized into Roman Catholicism
their fate after death has been something that The Catholic scholars are still debating and developing. ◉ Do babies who were not Roman Catholic - that haven not been sprinkled with holy water carry the original sin
◉ Will these babies who die be accepted in heaven and will these innocent beings, be sent to eternal hell fire.
Upon the Vatican Website
Vatican website states that - - St. Augustine's thoughts, theories and doctrines regarding the fate of “ un - baptized babies “ / infants were brought up or revived in the 16th century .....
(Paul III, Benedict XIV and also Clement XIII) defended and upheld the right of Catholics to teach Augustine's views theories and doctrines regarding babies dying under original sin who
“ un - baptized babies “ ( these babies ) are condemned and to punished with the eternal torment of the fire in hell BUT the baby would only suffer forever in eternity feeling a very, very mild pain,
not too hot ..... for the baby was was not a Roman Catholic.
St. Augustine elaborated on the pain that the baby would feel as he detailed - comparing the baby who was not Roman Catholic with the pain that was suffered by adults who were punished for their mortal sins.
in conclusion of the matter, in 1794 ) - Pius VI pronounced that it is perfectly fine to teach that babies who died with the guilt of original sin are punished but only punishment of " complete lack of the Beatific Vision " called
( “ punishment of loss ” ) - but not sensible pains not - (the punishment of "fire").
Pius VI resolved this matter " In the bull “Auctorem Fidei” (1794)
" the Pope condemned the teaching that places babies into hell fire and flames and pain who have not baptized and whose sins are only the sin of " ORIGINAL SIN " today the Vatican teaches that the punishment was not the same punishment of the condemned who will burn in eternal flames - punishment of fire.... the eventual fate of the “ un - baptized baby “ a baby who is not catholic, their final destination / judgment day determination / judgment and eventual fate after purgatory has punished them enough will be based upon God's mercy.
and this is not called Limbo any longer, - In Catholic Faith babies will suffer in purgatory but after being purified by suffering a loss as - (“punishment of loss”), - but not sensible pains
they will then be judged by God and God may choose to release the baby from its punishment in purgatory,
The question i ask - is the baby being punished for not being born into a Roman Catholic family ?
is not the blood of Jesus Christ sufficient to cleanse a newborn infant who has no condemnation nor guilt ?
To clarify for you what the scriptures truly say, the account of Lydia being converted in Acts 16 doesn't say "families" nor do any other scriptures in all bibles I've checked; it either says "house" or "household".Thanks DJT. We agree,infants have not and cannot commit sin.
Clearly you don't believe in original sin spoken of in Scripture and taught by Christianity for 2,000 years so I will skip that discussion. And you interpret the verses in Scripture on how baptism replaces circumcision and that 2,000-year teaching, so we won't get into that debate. And when Jesus said baptize all you don't think infants are part of all. And you don't believe that when Scripture says entire families were baptized you don't believe infants are part of entire families. You say infants can't believe....and I agree with you.
At what age can one or is one expected to start believing what is told of them and they be held accountable if they don't? At what age does one know they are committing a sin? When is, what some call, the age of reasoning?
Curious Mary
And the account of the jailer likewise says "he and his" and further goes on to refer to them as believing, and as we agreed , infants can't believe.
And the account Cornelius starting in Acts 10 mentions his household, and he sent his household servants and a guard to find Paul. And later in that chapter, those Gentiles that were baptized in Cornelius's house were those that spoke in other tongues, certainly not infants.
And in Acts 5:16 it says men and women who were believers were baptized, not infants
14And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.)
No such thing in the bible ad "original sin"
And a good reference for age of accountability would be that of Jesus, who is recorded as doing his father's work at the age of 12.
I wouldn't get hung up on 2000 years of teaching since the church started going astray right from the get go as can be seen reading the NT scriptures, so, multiply that by 2000 years which equates to a lot of false, man contrived nonsensical, unscriptural, teaching and practice.
Last edited:
Interesting too. You never said how you came to be "in Christ", yet you claim to be a sister in Christ (I have my doubts that you understand how that happens). If that's true, you should know how you got to be "in Christ".Got it........YOU have figured out what early Christian teachings are "contrary to sctitural {sic} doctrine" but Marymog and The Church hasn't figured out what is contrary to Scriptural doctrine? My doctrine is "man made" and your doctrine is.......God made?
Interesting......
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
You guys need to consider the tone of the Christians that are posting here. As a Theologian I run into it all the time. Even between people that call themselves Theologians. But true Theologians do not belong to any one denomination….Protestant or Catholic. A Baptist Theologian is really a Baptist scholar. Real Theologians do not have to deal with hate…hate for Catholics or Protestants. And real Theologians knows that hate is a spiritual poison. I can feel it in the posts on this forum.
A poison, a general dislike – hate between Catholics and Protestants. The Eastern Orthodox get left out, which probably a good thing. Admittedly there is a lot of bad blood between the Catholics and Protestants….there were even wars between the Catholics and Protestants, but most do not know enough about history to be knowledgeable about that. And the history of the Catholics is both good and bad. All kinds of good history
But all that gets mowed over by their bad history which is so horrific and evil that it would make you puke. It is over whelming that human beings could be so cruel and evil! There is no Theologian or historian that can explain that except to blame it on the general nature of man to become corrupt with power. But as it is today the Catholic Church has officially apologized for their past atrocities and the modern Catholic Church is better than it ever was. And it is a tenant of Christian faith to forgive. But one of their last lessons to learn is the trouble celibacy with clergy will continue to cause corruption in their church.
There are 30,000 Protestant denominations and some say over 50,000 world wide. I have counted 30,000 myself and yes there are duplicates. But even at that globally, the Roman Catholic Church out numbers all others combined at over 1.3 billion followers. If you add up all the Protestant denominations they number less than Catholic at 900 million worldwide.
But size does not make them right no more than diversity in Protestantism make them right. As a Theologian I can tell you that there is a certain amount of delusional thinking with both the Catholics and the Protestants. Catholics like to think that their Popes are a direct succession from the Apostle Peter. The Catholic Church was formed in the 4th century organized by the Ecumenical Councils and Emperor Constantine and the Roman Empire being the power behind the Church. And the first Pope was Sylvester I.
The Catholic Pope cannot claim anymore succession from the Apostle Peter than any Protestant Preacher. That being true because their religions are based on the same scriptures. What the Protestants cannot claim is history, for that reason they do not want to admit history. The Protestants think they are right because they hold to sola scriptura. But the concept of “Bible Only” or sola scriptura is a fallacy because Christianity adopted new beliefs, like a requirement for wedding ceremonies and the moratoriums of polygamy and concubinage and slavery all occurred centuries after the biblical era and they are still learning things about women’s rights.
Christ did not return soon and the Christian Church continued on after the biblical era. What does that mean? Think about it. We are all successor of the Apostle Peter and he was an example of us. He denied Yeshua and he wavered in his beliefs. We are all flawed but God loved us while we were yet sinners and are sinners. And God turned the church over to humanity.
It a great responsibility because we learn so slow. We are still learning that God sees men and women as equal Christians. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28 For how many centuries has Christianity ignored this scripture? So slow to learn.
So the point of all this historical review is that there is another lesson for Christianity and those on this forum to learn. We are all Christians and we should not hate other Christians, we should love one another. Christianity has become a smorgasbord of beliefs between the Catholics the Eastern Orthodox and the many Protestant denominations and their many beleifs. That is simply the reality of it all. The Catholics have added beliefs beyond the biblical era and the Protestants have added things beyond the biblical era….The lesson is love, the love of God and love He has shown us and that we should love one another.
And by the way....Go to church!
Grailhunter….The Johnny Appleseed of Truth
Be good and do good
A poison, a general dislike – hate between Catholics and Protestants. The Eastern Orthodox get left out, which probably a good thing. Admittedly there is a lot of bad blood between the Catholics and Protestants….there were even wars between the Catholics and Protestants, but most do not know enough about history to be knowledgeable about that. And the history of the Catholics is both good and bad. All kinds of good history
But all that gets mowed over by their bad history which is so horrific and evil that it would make you puke. It is over whelming that human beings could be so cruel and evil! There is no Theologian or historian that can explain that except to blame it on the general nature of man to become corrupt with power. But as it is today the Catholic Church has officially apologized for their past atrocities and the modern Catholic Church is better than it ever was. And it is a tenant of Christian faith to forgive. But one of their last lessons to learn is the trouble celibacy with clergy will continue to cause corruption in their church.
There are 30,000 Protestant denominations and some say over 50,000 world wide. I have counted 30,000 myself and yes there are duplicates. But even at that globally, the Roman Catholic Church out numbers all others combined at over 1.3 billion followers. If you add up all the Protestant denominations they number less than Catholic at 900 million worldwide.
But size does not make them right no more than diversity in Protestantism make them right. As a Theologian I can tell you that there is a certain amount of delusional thinking with both the Catholics and the Protestants. Catholics like to think that their Popes are a direct succession from the Apostle Peter. The Catholic Church was formed in the 4th century organized by the Ecumenical Councils and Emperor Constantine and the Roman Empire being the power behind the Church. And the first Pope was Sylvester I.
The Catholic Pope cannot claim anymore succession from the Apostle Peter than any Protestant Preacher. That being true because their religions are based on the same scriptures. What the Protestants cannot claim is history, for that reason they do not want to admit history. The Protestants think they are right because they hold to sola scriptura. But the concept of “Bible Only” or sola scriptura is a fallacy because Christianity adopted new beliefs, like a requirement for wedding ceremonies and the moratoriums of polygamy and concubinage and slavery all occurred centuries after the biblical era and they are still learning things about women’s rights.
Christ did not return soon and the Christian Church continued on after the biblical era. What does that mean? Think about it. We are all successor of the Apostle Peter and he was an example of us. He denied Yeshua and he wavered in his beliefs. We are all flawed but God loved us while we were yet sinners and are sinners. And God turned the church over to humanity.
It a great responsibility because we learn so slow. We are still learning that God sees men and women as equal Christians. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28 For how many centuries has Christianity ignored this scripture? So slow to learn.
So the point of all this historical review is that there is another lesson for Christianity and those on this forum to learn. We are all Christians and we should not hate other Christians, we should love one another. Christianity has become a smorgasbord of beliefs between the Catholics the Eastern Orthodox and the many Protestant denominations and their many beleifs. That is simply the reality of it all. The Catholics have added beliefs beyond the biblical era and the Protestants have added things beyond the biblical era….The lesson is love, the love of God and love He has shown us and that we should love one another.
And by the way....Go to church!
Grailhunter….The Johnny Appleseed of Truth
Be good and do good
Last edited:
Dash RipRock
Active Member
Jesus said it is required for salvation
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
So you'd better go get baptised
BreadOfLife
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2017
- 21,684
- 3,597
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
I'm simply illustrating the unbroken line of succession in the early Chgurch.
We can't simplu discard hisory in the name of an unbilical doctrine like Sola Scriptura . . .
Acts 1:20
“For it is written in the Book of Psalms, “‘May his camp become desolate, and let there be no one to dwell in it’; and “‘Let another take his office.’
2 Tim. 2:2
“…and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.”
Behold
Well-Known Member
Never.
He stated. (John 3) that you must be "Born....of water.. ( and that is of your mother)........and then you must be Born... .AGAIN..(of the Spirit).....and that is by the Holy Spirit.
There is also a large cult that teaches that Acts 2:38.....>"repent and be water baptized" is The Gospel.
And of course that's not a gospel....that is John the Baptist's demand for the Jews........that Peter was using, and later He didnt, once He met Paul and learned "The Gospel of the Grace of God".
Its the Catholic Cult........that teaches that water , the city water supply or any available water must be present, or a person can't receive God's Salvation.
I'll give you 3 situations where a person is born again and no water is present.
1.) In PRISON< in their prison cell.
2.) On your death bed, about to die, in the hospital....and you call out to God with faith in Christ and you are forgiven and saved.
3.) In a Foreign Country that does not allow Christianity, or Bibles, or water baptism..yet thousands per month are saved in these countries and there is no water baptism at that time.
Let me show you the verse..
Notice the 2nd part of your verse....
But He that "believeth NOT"... shall be damned.
Notice that damnation is not related to WATER........its related to FAITH........as "Justfication by Faith" is the understanding.
Se, we are damned if we dont Believe in Christ........and we are SAVED..........if we do.
After we are saved, we are to be water baptized, .....as this is symbolic of "being risen in new Life with Christ" and its also a public confession of our faith.
Dash RipRock
Active Member
That's because one is to be baptized after becoming believers
If someone refuses to believe there's no need to mention getting baptized.
The false brethren love to pick and choose which passages they believe as they reject passages that don't fit their fake religion
Those demons taught you to claim Jesus is a lair.
Behold
Well-Known Member
Do you have a bible handy?
Go to Acts 8
Read the account of the Eunuch and Philip .
Here is what you will find..
The Eunuch asks Philip if. "" He may be water baptized...."""
And Philip's reponse shows us clearly, how we are to understand...... water baptism.
Philip says.....>"Yes you may be water baptized, If you have BELIEVED with all your HEART.......= FIRST". (KJV)
See that?
That is FAITH in Christ, that God accepts......as """our faith is counted by God as righteousess"
That is when God forgives our sin, and gives us the new birth.....(Born......again)... as this is "Justification BY Faith".........and then we are to be water baptized, afterwards......at some point.......sooner is better, but later will do.
Salvation comes first........and then the Symbolic water baptism.
Paul is not a demon.
Paul teaches that "Jesus sent me not to water baptize"..........so, that is showing the Christians, and the real bible students that water baptism is not necessary for Salvation........as the Gospel came by Paul, and so, when he omits water baptism from THE GOSPEL....then that teaches us not to associate SALVATION and being born again ...with water
Marymog
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2017
- 11,970
- 1,796
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
I do know. I got to be in Christ via The Church he started. How did you get to be "in Christ"? You dodged my question: My doctrine is "man made" and your doctrine is.......God made?
Marymog
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2017
- 11,970
- 1,796
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
You suggest I shouldn't get "hung up on 2000 years of teaching" yet YOU are hung up on 500 years of teaching (Protestant teachings). Fascinating......The 500 year teaching you adhere to are not "false, man contrived nonsensical, unscriptural, teaching and practice" but the teachings of the men who spoke to the Apostles are "false, man contrived nonsensical, unscriptural, teaching and practice." Weird....
Marymog
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2017
- 11,970
- 1,796
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Except for when Mathias replaced Judas......other than that "Nowhere" can it be found. And your theory that the Apostles practiced what they preached only 1 time....when Judas was replaced....is laughable especially if you ignore historical Christian writings.
Thanks for your time David.....Mary.
Behold
Well-Known Member
Jesus is the only "Way" To God,,......... John 14:6
= See The Cross of Christ and Faith in Chfrist.......for the eternal update on how to become a Christian.
So, no "church" is the "way"... to God..... not yours, not anyone's.
Follow the actual scriptures, where they lead you and not secondary or tertiary documents or the men that "spoke to the Apostles". I choose to follow the scriptures.
You assume to much, like "we are all Christians". That most likely is NOT true. Most don't understand that it is a process to become a Christian, and that it's not simply a state or assent of mind, or decision whereby you say to yourself, ' I think I now believe in God and Christ, and I'm gonna start following the Lord, so, I'm a Christian now !' Unfortunately, that's what a great many people think. Hope I've made my point
Only if they have been through confirmation does an infant's Christening (named before God) become a Baptism.
Babies do not know right from wrong. It's not until year two that they even begin to have any sort of memory. (And it isn't much).
So....it's a somewhat given.