Posted on 06/15/2014 12:52:19 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
1.) An infant is baptized, is raised by believing parents and later when older turns from the faith.
2.) An infant is baptized, has no believing parents to be raised by, and when older doesn't turn from the faith.
Given that the antithesis exists for 1 & 2, wouldn't it be prudent for the priest to baptize the fortunate infant as well as the unfortunate, as either could remain faithful when older, show perseverance against high odds, and no priest knows the future - only God Almighty?
Given that only God knows the future, perhaps withholding baptism isn't an option at all for the priest. If the priest is unsure about 1, 2 or the antithesis for both, should they let God do their baptizing for them if they lack faith?
So you follow Peter, and not Jesus then?
The thief on the cross next to Jesus is proof we do not need to be baptized in order to be Saved, rather submitting one's self to baptism is an act of faith and obedience.
Baptism does not equal salvation. Jesus in one's heart and life is what saves. Nothing more, nothing less.
To say otherwise is to say Jesus' death on the cross wasn't for our sins.
If you will please check into it....the Catholic Bible had all the books in it. It was the Reformation that took books out.
Did you have it backwards or what?
Check it out?
See what tender mercies the nuns and priests afforded these infants and babies.
Even Forbes with its news article defense is relying on the “those poor nuns were just ignorant” defense.
The best they have.
Where did the thief end up?
What evidence do you have for who died and was buried there?
“As I said above the baby is there, the parents are there and the godparents are there. There is no “proxy” baptism in Catholicism.”
What is not there is the baby’s faith. And baptism without faith is meaningless. We are saved by grace thru faith, not grace thru baptism. After all, as narses put it when not posting cartoons:
“In infant baptism, the faith of parents and sponsors is required.”
If one counts on someone else’s faith to save them, and baptizes them on that basis, then you are doing what the Mormons do - baptizing person A based on person B’s faith.
Jesus told the disciple he would send the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth. Do you think Peter contradicted Jesus in his epistles?
First off, Jesus had the power to forgive sins. He forgave them thief when he asked to be forgiven.
Jesus, though the teachings of his disciples, has told us how to come to Him.
I never said baptism equals salvation. But baptism IS essential for Salvation. Jesus died on the cross for us. We come into contact with His blood through obedience, which includes baptism for the remission of sins.
Versus apparently 100% of those babies/infants that weren’t baptized.
No proof yet from the RCC that any of those babies/infants found were baptized.
Suffer the little ones to come to the RCC?
Heck no!
Might as well go to nurse ratchet.
The child assumes that faith at the age of reason.
Would you rather have your child banned from heaven?
Good night?
“No proof yet from the RCC that any of those babies/infants found were baptized.”
Nor any “proof” from you that the “RCC” had anything to do with that.
So you say. And yet you are wrong. Guessing just doesn’t cut it.
“Where did the thief end up?”
In Heaven of course. What was your odd guess?
“See what tender mercies the nuns and priests afforded these infants and babies.”
What “infants and babies”? Be specific. What are the names and dates of death of the folks you are so worried about?
And Roman Catholics, just like Mormons, have additional books that they add to the scriptures with...
The Good Thief ended up in Paradise, a waiting place where all the good people of the Old Testament were waiting to enter heaven. Christ was the first person into heaven. Everyone else had to wait a little bit.
Actually technically it wasn't a "Christian" baptism, it was a Jewish Mikvah. A "Christian" baptism requires the use of the Trinitarian formula. Since John did not say: "I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit." only a washing occurred.
And yes the Greek word for washing/ wetting is baptisio, that does not negate the fact that no Trinitarian formula was used.
“The child assumes that faith at the age of reason.
Would you rather have your child banned from heaven?”
Except, of course, it very often does not. I’ve known a lot of folks who were baptized as babies but who were atheists as adults.
Nor will lacking water baptism prevent anyone from going to heaven. As it is written:
“11 “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”
Either Jesus baptizes you with the Holy Spirit, or he will baptize you with fire at judgment. And it is by the Spirit that we are placed in Christ:
“12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.”
“I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, 3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”
Of course, when someone DOES believe, they should be baptized with water - not for justification, but for sanctification, as Peter explained in his letters, and as he described at Pentecost: “ And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” 41 So those who received his word were baptized...”
I’ll go with what Jesus said.
Glad you don't deny what Peter said...Apparently you just don't believe him, even tho Jesus inspired him to write to us what he did...
I just want Roman Catholics to know that ALL babies left, placed or put in their care must be baptized, even one born out of wedlock, or one dropped off, not that I believe in this, but because they need to recognize that believing parents is no guarantee that the child will follow the RCC teachings when older, nor is #2 as listed in the first post a guarantee of anything. Nor are the antithesis of 1 or 2.
The priest needs to understand that they have no legitimate right to not give any 800 or even one a proper burial, especially if the unwed mother is RC and became pregnant.
Francis can really show that he has true compassion. Now, if ever, is his opportunity.
Most of those have nothing to do with baby baptism or baptism at all...But here's one you posted that has to do with baptism...
Then he (the jailer) brought them (Paul and Silas) out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you and your household will be saved.” So they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to everyone in his house.
you know what this verse says about baptism??? NOTHING...It ain't there...They got saved without water baptism...They were instructed on how to get saved and it doesn't include baptism...
The baby got wet...That is all...He/she doesn't have a clue what going on...
If you can baptize babies, you can baptize anyone, while they are sleeping...Or while they are passed out drunk...
A Catholic may have snuck up behind me, dropped a couple of drops of water on my hat and quietly said, 'In the name of the Father, the ~~~~'...I may be a Catholic unknowingly, and unwillingly...
And talk about bondage...When the baby gets old enough to decide he/she wants to be a Protestant or even an atheist, some Catholic clown comes along and says, yer outta luck sonny...Once a Catholic, always a Catholic...
What a scammin' religion...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.