What is the purpose of infant baptism?

[Truther]

Soooo, according to YOU - the following verse is "invalid" because Jesus is NOT mentioned by name . . .
John 3:16
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only SON, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Do YOU believe in the Son?? How can you have faith in a title??
Do you now realize how stupid you sound?

Since the devils believe there must be an additional requirement to believing.

Something they cannot do.

Being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

Catholics can’t either unless God allows them.

 

[Truther]

One gets born again first... THEN gets water baptized as we see in the New Testament.

Getting dunked in the water is not when one gets born again of the spirit... it's when their flesh is cleansed not their spirit.

The Blood of Jesus is what washes out sin away, not water.

But, getting baptized is what the Lord said to do so disobedience is not the path take.

Some just have the cart before the horse falsely claiming one is born again when they are baptized.

One cannot be baptized until AFTER they have been born again as we see in scripture.

I've talked to some church of christ peoples who claim that if someone gets born again and die in an accident on the way to getting water baptized, they go to hell which is ignorance gone to seed.

These same people claim Jesus lied when He told the thief on the Cross He would be saved even though the thief on the Cross had no opportunity to get baptized after believing on the Lord.

The Holy Ghost leads us to being baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of our sins.

It was never a replacement.

Notice the pattern I just described in Acts 10.

Now you know why we must be baptized in Jesus name. The Holy Ghost leads us to our burial. We don’t lead ourselves.

 

[Truther]

No - I've ALWAYS acknowledged that His name is Jesus.

No,
What a stupid question . . .

Jesus is ALWAYS the Son, Einstein . . .

If you agree, that Jesus is the son and that is his name, then why do you insist on baptizing them in the title son and not in the name of the son as he commanded?

Is it because Roman Catholics have a very hard time following orders?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yeah so where did Jesus instruct His followers to get in touch with His momma and see if she'll put in a good word for them?

What chapter and verse can we find this? View attachment 48386

Right there in James 5:16.
"Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working."

Was Mary kicked OUT of the Body of Christ?
Did I miss the memo??

 

[Truther]

“Truther” is a fictitious name, but it is a type of a name. Son is not a name at all. It is straight up title.

You might as well baptize in the name of Truther and you will get farther than just saying son.

 

[BreadOfLife]

If you agree, that Jesus is the son and that is his name, then why do you insist on baptizing them in the title son and not in the name of the son as he commanded?

Because Jesus, the Son commanded us to (Matt. 28:19) . . .

Is it because Roman Catholics have a very hard time following orders?

Uhhhh - we ARE following orders . . .

Matt. 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

 

[BreadOfLife]

“Truther” is a fictitious name, but it is a type of a name. Son is not a name at all. It is straight up title.

You might as well baptize in the name of Truther and you will get farther than just saying son.

I suggest you repent for your blasphemy before it's too late . . .

 

[Truther]

Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize in the name of the son. The Roman Catholics say, I baptize you in the name of the son. Jesus is telling them to stop parroting him and do what he commands.

The Roman Catholics say, “baaaack. Perty bird”.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Since the devils believe there must be an additional requirement to believing.

Something they cannot do.

Being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

Catholics can’t either unless God allows them.

The context of John 3:16 is FAITH - not just intellectual assent.
It's talking about "belief" that SAVES you - and that can only be faith.

Context, son - CONTEXT . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize in the name of the son.
The Roman Catholics say, I baptize you in the name of the son. Jesus is telling them to stop parroting him and do what he commands.

The Roman Catholics say, “baaaack. Perty bird”.

WRONG again.
He said to Baptize in the name of the FATHER and of the SON and of the HOLY SPIRIT.

Get your facts straight sparly . . .

 

[Truther]

The context of John 3:16 is FAITH - not just intellectual assent.
It's talking about "belief" that SAVES you - and that can only be faith.

Context, son - CONTEXT . . .

God will not let you get baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins unless you repent.

 

[Truther]

WRONG again.
He said to Baptize in the name of the FATHER and of the SON and of the HOLY SPIRIT.

Get your facts straight sparly . . .

What is the name of the son per that verse?

 

[Stumpmaster]

Thank you for clarifying. It seems like a good position to have a forum that is neutral and does not promote a particular brand.

That reminds me of a Christian apologetics principle I studied that states their is no common ground between a genuine Christian and a non-Christian. That doesn't mean they have to be at each other's throats but it does mean there is no neutral position for a Bible-believer, a genuine, Spirit-filled Christian.

Quite a bit of the NT deals with divisions and differences among the saints, and the reality is they occur over the slightest variables of doctrine, so it would be very difficult to administrate a forum where neutrality had to be observed, and the SoF of such a forum would read like a humanist manifesto.

 

[Truther]

That reminds me of a Christian apologetics principle I studied that states their is no common ground between a genuine Christian and a non-Christian. That doesn't mean they have to be at each other's throats but it does mean there is no neutral position for a Bible-believer, a genuine, Spirit-filled Christian.

Quite a bit of the NT deals with divisions and differences among the saints, and the reality is they occur over the slightest variables of doctrine, so it would be very difficult to administrate a forum where neutrality had to be observed, and the SoF of such a forum would read like a humanist manifesto.

We are all passionate about our beliefs, right or wrong.

The key to learning is to disconnect emotionally from our beliefs and be able to process a different perspective of our beliefs. Just think about what is being presented.

I used to say about certain beliefs “I believe in this or that”, but after testing my beliefs, I now reject or modify them so I can say “I know for a scriptural fact this or that”.

Good thing for me I have no skin in the game and you would know what I mean.

It all started for me when I threw out mass commentary.

Then I went back to a literal reading of the Bible.

I have been teaching it since 1980, but made quite a few changes to my own beliefs to fit the Bible, not for the Bible to fit my beliefs.

Just being brutally honest with myself and God.

 

[Dan Clarkston]

The Holy Ghost leads us to being baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of our sins.

It was never a replacement.

Notice the pattern I just described in Acts 10.

Now you know why we must be baptized in Jesus name. The Holy Ghost leads us to our burial. We don’t lead ourselves.

Jesus taught that His disciples were to baptize others in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19).

A person who is baptized in Jesus' name is someone who has believed in Jesus as Savior. This shortened version stated in Acts 2 and 4 did not negate what Jesus taught, but rather emphasized salvation exclusively in Jesus. The practice of the early church was to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit as Jesus taught, emphasizing the Triune nature of God.

 

[Dan Clarkston]

"Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working."

Speaking of people here on earth... mentions nothing about contacting the dead which is necromancy

You people do not even pray directly to the Father in Jesus Name as the Lord instructs... because you know know the Father.

Since you do not know the Father and are not born again, you people go around asking others to pray to the Father for you.

You need to believe what God's Word teaches in John 16:23, Luke 11:1-13, Matthew 6:9-13, John 15:16, John 16:23-24, 1 Peter 1:17, Hebrews 7:25, John 14:6

 

[Dan Clarkston]

I have been teaching it since 1980, but made quite a few changes to my own beliefs to fit the Bible, not for the Bible to fit my beliefs.

That's the way to do it right there!

 

[Truther]

Jesus taught that His disciples were to baptize others in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19).

A person who is baptized in Jesus' name is someone who has believed in Jesus as Savior. This shortened version stated in Acts 2 and 4 did not negate what Jesus taught, but rather emphasized salvation exclusively in Jesus. The practice of the early church was to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit as Jesus taught, emphasizing the Triune nature of God.

So per Acts chapter 2, and chapter 4, etc. the disciples were wrong for baptizing Only in the name of Jesus?

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

Speaking of people here on earth... mentions nothing about contacting the dead which is necromancy.

Some object that the Catholic position on intercessory prayer is the same as necromancy, that is, calling upon the spirits of the dead to find out the future or obtain other information. Necromancy is a grave sin that, far from fostering communion, shows a lack of faith and trust in God. Necromancy was punishable by death under the Mosaic law (Lev. 19:31, 20:6). Some of the early Israelites practiced necromancy, including Saul (1 Sam. 28:3, 8-14), and they were punished severely for doing so (1 Sam. 28:17-19). This practice offended God (2 Kings 21:6) and led to the destruction of Israel.

Catholics do not practice necromancy, which is explicitly forbidden by the Church (cf. Catechism, nos. 2115-17). Rather, they ask for the prayers of the saints to foster communion in the Family of God.

Seeking the intercession of the saints is not necromancy for two reasons:

First, necromancers are usually trying to receive information that they do not have, such as what will happen in the future. Asking the saints to pray for us, however, is not a form of divination or fortune telling.

Second, necromancers are also trying to bring back and control the souls of dead people. Catholics, on the contrary, believe that those who have died in God’s grace are not dead but truly alive, and are able to help us by their prayers. As Jesus says, “[Moses] calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Now he is not the God of the dead, but of the living; for all live to him” (Lk. 20:37-38).

According to Jesus, death cannot separate the faithful—such as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—from God. And, if they are alive to God, they must be alive to us through Him as members of His one body. Otherwise, contrary to what Saint Paul says, Christ’s victory over death was incomplete, and His body is not truly one (cf. Jn.17:21; 1 Cor. 12: 12,13; 15:14 et al).

Is Invocation Of The Saints Equivalent To Necromancy?

Catholics agree necromancy is prohibited. The difference in communion of saints is the source of the supernatural power and the intention.

www.patheos.com

 

[Marymog]

Apologies are beyond the scope of your capabiliteis.

Lol GG...ONCE AGAIN, what you say is not true.

Go to the search option. Type in "I apologize". Scroll down and insert "Marymog" into the 'member' option. Click on search.

Presto magico you see multiple posts where Marymog has apologized.


Soooooooooooo, once again, you are wrong.