with out the infant baptised there would not be one christian to day

[Selene]

This confusion with the Holy Spirit is very confusing. The Holy Spirit is not received at baptism. The NT says no such thing. We are sealed with the Holy Spirit when we believe
and there is also the second infilling for the gifts of the Spirit...just ask a Charismatic Catholic Christian Selene and they will be glad to sort you out I'm sure.

The beauty about the Roman Catholic Church is that regardless of whether he/she is a Charismatic Catholic, a Neocatechumenal Way Catholic, an Opus Dei Catholic, a Focular Catholic, a Benedictine Order Catholic, a Dominican Order Catholic, or a Franciscan Order Catholic, is that we all follow the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which says that we receive the Holy Spirit in Baptism in the same way Christ was baptized at the Jordan River. We are not baptized with John or by John. We are one with Christ in His baptism.


CCC 694 Water. The symbolism of water signifies the Holy Spirit's action in Baptism, since after the invocation of the Holy Spirit it becomes the efficacious sacramental sign of new birth: just as the gestation of our first birth took place in water, so the water of Baptism truly signifies that our birth into the divine life is given to us in the Holy Spirit. As "by one Spirit we were all baptized," so we are also "made to drink of one Spirit." Thus the Spirit is also personally the living water welling up from Christ crucified as its source and welling up in us to eternal life.

We are sealed with the Holy Spirit when we get born again, But there is a different experience called the Baptism in the Holy Ghost.
Jesus told His disciples that they would receive power when they get baptised in the Holy Gost, Acts 1: 4--5, & 8.
Yet some of those disciples were already saved and sealed with the Holy Spirit in Jn 20: 22, We know Peter was, Because Jesus asked Peter if he had the agape love of God, In Jn 21: 15--17.
One cannot have the agape love of God unless they are born again.

Plus, The disciples in Acts 8, Were born again and baptised in water, Yet they weren't baptised in the Holy Ghost until the Apostles laid hands on them, V14--17.

Plus, Paul asked some disciples if they had rceived the baptism in the Holy Ghost, Acts 19: 2--6.
If the baptism in the Holy Ghost was the same as the rebirth, Why would Paul asked the question??.. He would have known they had the Holy Ghost, If it wasn't a sepperate experience.

Christ said that one must be born of water and spirit in order to enter the Kingdom of God. Those disciples whom Paul met were only born of water, so Paul gave them the Spirit so they could be born of spirit.

In Acts 10, Cornelius and his household received the holy Spirit. So, Peter gave them water so they could be born of water. Christ said that one must be born of water AND spirit. He did not say that one must be born of ONLY spirit. Water was included.

Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

 

[jiggyfly]

The beauty about the Roman Catholic Church is that regardless of whether he/she is a Charismatic Catholic, a Neocatechumenal Way Catholic, an Opus Dei Catholic, a Focular Catholic, a Benedictine Order Catholic, a Dominican Order Catholic, or a Franciscan Order Catholic, is that we all follow the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which says that we receive the Holy Spirit in Baptism in the same way Christ was baptized at the Jordan River. We are not baptized with John or by John. We are one with Christ in His baptism.


CCC 694 Water. The symbolism of water signifies the Holy Spirit's action in Baptism, since after the invocation of the Holy Spirit it becomes the efficacious sacramental sign of new birth: just as the gestation of our first birth took place in water, so the water of Baptism truly signifies that our birth into the divine life is given to us in the Holy Spirit. As "by one Spirit we were all baptized," so we are also "made to drink of one Spirit." Thus the Spirit is also personally the living water welling up from Christ crucified as its source and welling up in us to eternal life.


Christ said that one must be born of water and spirit in order to enter the Kingdom of God. Those disciples whom Paul met were only born of water, so Paul gave them the Spirit so they could be born of spirit.

In Acts 10, Cornelius and his household received the holy Spirit. So, Peter gave them water so they could be born of water. Christ said that one must be born of water AND spirit. He did not say that one must be born of ONLY spirit. Water was included.

Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Don't you see this scripture account of Cornelius as a contradiction to what the Catholic religion believes concerning the baptism of HolySpirit?

 

[Selene]

Don't you see this scripture account of Cornelius as a contradiction to what the Catholic religion believes concerning the baptism of HolySpirit?

No, it's not a contradiction. Jesus is the Way. When Christ was baptized by John at the Jordan River, He received the Holy Spirit. Christ showed that a person can receive the Holy Spirit when baptized with water.....through the laying of the hands (See Acts 8:18).

If a person is baptized without the laying of the hands, then their baptism is incomplete. There is only one baptism as St. Paul says. It is a baptism of water and spirit together......not water alone and not spirit alone. As you can see in the Bible, the spirit is needed in Acts 8, and water is needed in Acts 10.

 

[jiggyfly]

No, it's not a contradiction. Jesus is the Way. When Christ was baptized by John at the Jordan River, He received the Holy Spirit. Christ showed that a person can receive the Holy Spirit when baptized with water.....through the laying of the hands (See Acts 8:18).

If a person is baptized without the laying of the hands, then their baptism is incomplete. There is only one baptism as St. Paul says. It is a baptism of water and spirit together......not water alone and not spirit alone. As you can see in the Bible, the spirit is needed in Acts 8, and water is needed in Acts 10.

In Cornelius' case they were baptized in the HolySpirit before they were baptized in water.

13 Has Christ been divided into factions? Was I, Paul, crucified for you? Were any of you baptized in the name of Paul? Of course not!14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,15 for now no one can say they were baptized in my name.16 (Oh yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas, but I don’t remember baptizing anyone else.)17 For Christ didn’t send me to baptize, but to preach the Good News—and not with clever speech, for fear that the cross of Christ would lose its power.
1 Cor 1:13-17 (NLT)

Does Paul mention the water baptism as a necessity?

 

[Selene]

In Cornelius' case they were baptized in the HolySpirit before they were baptized in water.

13 Has Christ been divided into factions? Was I, Paul, crucified for you? Were any of you baptized in the name of Paul? Of course not!14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,15 for now no one can say they were baptized in my name.16 (Oh yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas, but I don’t remember baptizing anyone else.)17 For Christ didn’t send me to baptize, but to preach the Good News—and not with clever speech, for fear that the cross of Christ would lose its power.
1 Cor 1:13-17 (NLT)

Does Paul mention the water baptism as a necessity?

Do not take what Paul said out of context. First of all, Paul did baptize.....but what made him upset was that the Corinthians were saying that they were baptized in the name of Paul. Look at what I placed in bold in your quote. Nowhere in here is Paul saying that baptism is NOT necessary, and nowhere in here is Paul saying that baptism should be rid of.

 

[jiggyfly]

Do not take what Paul said out of context. First of all, Paul did baptize.....but what made him upset was that the Corinthians were saying that they were baptized in the name of Paul. Look at what I placed in bold in your quote. Nowhere in here is Paul saying that baptism is NOT necessary, and nowhere in here is Paul saying that baptism should be rid of.

And nowhere does Paul say water baptism is necessary.

At any rate we can easily see that some have received the HolySpirit without having been water baptized.

 

[Selene]

And nowhere does Paul say water baptism is necessary.

At any rate we can easily see that some have received the HolySpirit without having been water baptized.

The fact that God Himself was the one who instituted water baptism shows that it is necessary. Water baptism was not instituted by man. The Holy Bible shows that both water and spirit are needed. Remember Christ did say that one must be born of water and spirit. He did not say that one must be born of only spirit. The Holy Bible shows that both are needed. In Acts 8, the spirit was give to those who only have water, and in Acts 10, water was given to those who only have the spirit. This alone tells you that both are necessary. Even Christ was baptized in both water and spirit.

 

[Alanforchrist]

The beauty about the Roman Catholic Church is that regardless of whether he/she is a Charismatic Catholic, a Neocatechumenal Way Catholic, an Opus Dei Catholic, a Focular Catholic, a Benedictine Order Catholic, a Dominican Order Catholic, or a Franciscan Order Catholic, is that we all follow the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which says that we receive the Holy Spirit in Baptism in the same way Christ was baptized at the Jordan River. We are not baptized with John or by John. We are one with Christ in His baptism.


CCC 694 Water. The symbolism of water signifies the Holy Spirit's action in Baptism, since after the invocation of the Holy Spirit it becomes the efficacious sacramental sign of new birth: just as the gestation of our first birth took place in water, so the water of Baptism truly signifies that our birth into the divine life is given to us in the Holy Spirit. As "by one Spirit we were all baptized," so we are also "made to drink of one Spirit." Thus the Spirit is also personally the living water welling up from Christ crucified as its source and welling up in us to eternal life.


Christ said that one must be born of water and spirit in order to enter the Kingdom of God. Those disciples whom Paul met were only born of water, so Paul gave them the Spirit so they could be born of spirit.

In Acts 10, Cornelius and his household received the holy Spirit. So, Peter gave them water so they could be born of water. Christ said that one must be born of water AND spirit. He did not say that one must be born of ONLY spirit. Water was included.

Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Jesus never said one must be born of the Spirit and baptised in water, False religions made that lie up.
I have shown that the "water" in jn 3: 5, Is the word.

PLEASE NOTE, The Gentiles in Acts 10, Were ALREADY saved, So how could water bapyism save??
They were saved, baptised in the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues,[Which is the Biblical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Ghost], And one cannot have the Holy Ghost unless they are saved.... But PLEASE NOTE, They weren't baptised in water at that time....WERE THEY???. NO..NO.... So how can you say water baptism saves??.

 

[jiggyfly]

The fact that God Himself was the one who instituted water baptism shows that it is necessary. Water baptism was not instituted by man. The Holy Bible shows that both water and spirit are needed. Remember Christ did say that one must be born of water and spirit. He did not say that one must be born of only spirit. The Holy Bible shows that both are needed. In Acts 8, the spirit was give to those who only have water, and in Acts 10, water was given to those who only have the spirit. This alone tells you that both are necessary. Even Christ was baptized in both water and spirit.

But scriptures show that they are two different baptisms and being sprinkled with water does not mean that one has been baptized in HolySpirit.

 

[Selene]

Jesus never said one must be born of the Spirit and baptised in water, False religions made that lie up.
I have shown that the "water" in jn 3: 5, Is the word.

PLEASE NOTE, The Gentiles in Acts 10, Were ALREADY saved, So how could water bapyism save??
They were saved, baptised in the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues,[Which is the Biblical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Ghost], And one cannot have the Holy Ghost unless they are saved.... But PLEASE NOTE, They weren't baptised in water at that time....WERE THEY???. NO..NO.... So how can you say water baptism saves??.

Jesus said that one must be born of water and spirit. That is what I've always been saying. And to be born of water and spirit is baptism.......a baptism that is like Christ, who was baptized at the Jordan River. Christ was baptized with water and spirit. That is what I've always been saying. Was Christ baptized with water?? Yes. Did He receive the Holy Spirit when He was baptized with water?? Yes. This is the kind of baptism that we have......and tell me......what is wrong with that baptism??

Where in Acts 10 does it say that the Gentiles were already saved??

 

[jiggyfly]

Jesus said that one must be born of water and spirit. That is what I've always been saying. And to be born of water and spirit is baptism.......a baptism that is like Christ, who was baptized at the Jordan River. Christ was baptized with water and spirit. That is what I've always been saying. Was Christ baptized with water?? Yes. Did He receive the Holy Spirit when He was baptized with water?? Yes. This is the kind of baptism that we have......and tell me......what is wrong with that baptism??

Where in Acts 10 does it say that the Gentiles were already saved??

It seems to me that you are suggesting that we receive the HolySpirit and/or salvation as a result of water baptism.

 

[Selene]

It seems to me that you are suggesting that we receive the HolySpirit and/or salvation as a result of water baptism.

Where in my post did I suggest that? Was it not Jesus who stated that one must be born of water and spirit to enter the Kingdom of God?

 

[Niki]

We are sealed with the Holy Spirit when we get born again, But there is a different experience called the Baptism in the Holy Ghost.
Jesus told His disciples that they would receive power when they get baptised in the Holy Gost, Acts 1: 4--5, & 8.
Yet some of those disciples were already saved and sealed with the Holy Spirit in Jn 20: 22, We know Peter was, Because Jesus asked Peter if he had the agape love of God, In Jn 21: 15--17.
One cannot have the agape love of God unless they are born again.

Plus, The disciples in Acts 8, Were born again and baptised in water, Yet they weren't baptised in the Holy Ghost until the Apostles laid hands on them, V14--17.

Plus, Paul asked some disciples if they had rceived the baptism in the Holy Ghost, Acts 19: 2--6.
If the baptism in the Holy Ghost was the same as the rebirth, Why would Paul asked the question??.. He would have known they had the Holy Ghost, If it wasn't a sepperate experience.

Yeah that's what I said Alan. That's what I said.

They are two separate things and as you have repeatedly pointed out to Selene, baptism does not save anyone.

Well, I'm done with trying to discuss anything with her because it's impossible. She loves the last word so I say let her have it! ^_^
She's wrong anyway, so it's just a waste of time. You can't discuss anything with someone who believes they know more than what is in the Bible and more than
all the information of all the collected works of every Catholic who ever lived.

 

[Selene]

Yeah that's what I said Alan. That's what I said.

They are two separate things and as you have repeatedly pointed out to Selene, baptism does not save anyone.

Well, I'm done with trying to discuss anything with her because it's impossible. She loves the last word so I say let her have it! ^_^

She's wrong anyway, so it's just a waste of time. You can't discuss anything with someone who believes they know more than what is in the Bible and more than
all the information of all the collected works of every Catholic who ever lived.

I already gave scripture showing that baptism can save.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

The problem is that you are only reading what you want to read and leave out the part you don't like. In other words, this is how you read it: He that believeth shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

I don't do things like that. I read the entire sentence. <_<

 

[jiggyfly]

Where in my post did I suggest that? Was it not Jesus who stated that one must be born of water and spirit to enter the Kingdom of God?

Read your last post.

 

[Alanforchrist]

Jesus said that one must be born of water and spirit. That is what I've always been saying. And to be born of water and spirit is baptism.......a baptism that is like Christ, who was baptized at the Jordan River. Christ was baptized with water and spirit. That is what I've always been saying. Was Christ baptized with water?? Yes. Did He receive the Holy Spirit when He was baptized with water?? Yes. This is the kind of baptism that we have......and tell me......what is wrong with that baptism??

Where in Acts 10 does it say that the Gentiles were already saved??

Being born of the water and the Spirit, ISN'T water baptism,, As I have proved from the Bible and the Greek texts.

Jesus was the Son of God before He was baptised in water.
And He is our example, First become a child of God, THEN AND THEN only can one be baptised.

You said, "Where in Acts 10 does it say that the Gentiles were already saved??".
I take it you are joking, RIGHT??.
See v 4--46,
V43, They heard the word, And they must have believed, Because in V44 they received the Holy Ghost, You cannot have the Holy Ghost unless you are saved, Jn 14: 16--17.
So the Gentiles in Acts 10 were saved, Baptised in the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues

But they weren't baptised in water... The Bible rests it's case, Water baptism doesn't save.

Yeah that's what I said Alan. That's what I said.

They are two separate things and as you have repeatedly pointed out to Selene, baptism does not save anyone.

Well, I'm done with trying to discuss anything with her because it's impossible. She loves the last word so I say let her have it! ^_^

She's wrong anyway, so it's just a waste of time. You can't discuss anything with someone who believes they know more than what is in the Bible and more than
all the information of all the collected works of every Catholic who ever lived.

The trouble with catholics, Is, They have to believe what the catholic church tells them, Even though we give them the scriptures.
They are taught that the catholic church has the authority, And whatever it says is truth.


I was having a conversation with a catholic about priests not getting married, And I shown him criptures which says God's Ministers can get married, So he said,
"I'll have to see what my priest says about that",.. [Meaning that his priest has final authority].

So I said, Forget what your priest says, THIS IS WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS.

I already gave scripture showing that baptism can save.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

The problem is that you are only reading what you want to read and leave out the part you don't like. In other words, this is how you read it: He that believeth shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

I don't do things like that. I read the entire sentence. <_<

I have already shown you waht Mk 16: 16 means, And it doesn't mean baptism saves.

PLEASE NOTE, What Jesus DIDN'T say.
"He that isn't baptised shall be damned".. DID HE???. NO, He said.

"He that believeth not, Shall be damned".
The iriginal Greek emphesis for, "Saved", Is on the "BELIEVING", nOT BAPTISM.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

PLEASE NOTE, What Jesus DIDN'T say.
"He that isn't baptised shall be damned".. DID HE???. NO, He said.

"He that believeth not, Shall be damned".
The iriginal Greek emphesis for, "Saved", Is on the "BELIEVING", nOT BAPTISM.

actually Jesus said "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." Far from supporting your point, it makes inseparable faith from the action of baptism. If those who both believed and are baptized are saved, then by default those who don't believe and aren't baptized are condemned. But here is were you attempt to drive a wedge into what is inseparable. Belief isn't a feeling, it's an action (faith without works is dead). It isn't intellectual assent, it's physical acts that reveal an inner conversion of the heart. The words of Jesus do much to emphasize this point that believing and being baptized are one in the same, to the point that to say those who don't believe and aren't baptized would be an exercise in redundancy. Then Peter says in Acts, "Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins." Gee, I wonder where he learned that from? Here again, faith and action are inseparably linked (faith without works is dead) And if that weren't proof enough, the people who heard Peter were immediately baptized; they didn't schedule it for another day. So belief and baptism happen concurrently.

 

[Alanforchrist]

actually Jesus said "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." Far from supporting your point, it makes inseparable faith from the action of baptism. If those who both believed and are baptized are saved, then by default those who don't believe and aren't baptized are condemned. But here is were you attempt to drive a wedge into what is inseparable. Belief isn't a feeling, it's an action (faith without works is dead). It isn't intellectual assent, it's physical acts that reveal an inner conversion of the heart. The words of Jesus do much to emphasize this point that believing and being baptized are one in the same, to the point that to say those who don't believe and aren't baptized would be an exercise in redundancy. Then Peter says in Acts, "Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins." Gee, I wonder where he learned that from? Here again, faith and action are inseparably linked (faith without works is dead) And if that weren't proof enough, the people who heard Peter were immediately baptized; they didn't schedule it for another day. So belief and baptism happen concurrently.

Not according to the Greek text, The emphesis for, "Saved", In Mk 16: 16, Is on the believing, NOT BAPTISM.
The Greek emphesis for,"Remision of sins", In Acts 2: 38, Is on the "Repenting", NOT BAPTISED.

A study of the Bible, Proves that water baptism DOESN'T save.... And the Greek texts backs it up.

Only unsaved false religious people belive water baptism saves..Those who are saved, Know water baptism doesn't save.

Jesus never said, those who aren't baptized are condemned... He said, Those who don't believe are condemned.

 

[Niki]

I already gave scripture showing that baptism can save.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

The problem is that you are only reading what you want to read and leave out the part you don't like. In other words, this is how you read it: He that believeth shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

I don't do things like that. I read the entire sentence. <_<

The Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable.

Your Pope is supposed to be infallible.

They are the both the same.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Not according to the Greek text, The emphesis for, "Saved", In Mk 16: 16, Is on the believing, NOT BAPTISM.
The Greek emphesis for,"Remision of sins", In Acts 2: 38, Is on the "Repenting", NOT BAPTISED.

A study of the Bible, Proves that water baptism DOESN'T save.... And the Greek texts backs it up.

Only unsaved false religious people belive water baptism saves..Those who are saved, Know water baptism doesn't save.

Jesus never said, those who aren't baptized are condemned... He said, Those who don't believe are condemned.

Now you're saying that people who believe in efficacious water baptism are "unsaved false religious people".....and that would be the vast majority of Christians all over the world.

The Titanic was supposed to be unsinkable.

Your Pope is supposed to be infallible.

They are the both the same.

That's a lapse in logic there. The Titanic can be sinkable while the Pope infallible when speaking definitively on issues of faith, morals, and doctrine. The former is a work of men and subject to futility, the latter a work of the Holy Spirit and thus enduring and irreproachable.