Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Baptism merely symbolic?

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    santing
    Registered Users Posts: 671 ✭✭✭santing


    Jakkass wrote: »
    Just look at the archaeology of the Essenes settlement in Qumran, there was a mikveh there. That was at Jesus' time I thought?
    The Essenes were not a "standard" Jewish group - they were outsiders. The findings are of a slightly later date - say end of first century.

    The Mikveh is traditionally based on the ritual bathing required when someone was ceremonially unclean e.g.:
      Deu 23:10,11 (ESV) "If any man among you becomes unclean because of a nocturnal emission, then he shall go outside the camp. He shall not come inside the camp, but when evening comes, he shall bathe himself in water, and as the sun sets, he may come inside the camp.
      The septuagint doesn't use the word "baptism" here (or in similar places) but translates "wash his body." It is not clear if a bath / immersion was required. This ritual washing did become the Mikveh at some stage, but I don't think it was associated with the word baptism.


    1. Options
      #33
      PDN
      Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


      santing wrote: »
      This ritual washing did become the Mikveh at some stage, but I don't think it was associated with the word baptism.

      Nor, I believe, would it have been associated with the idea of birth or new birth at the time of Jesus or Nicodemus.

      Welcome to the board, Santing.


    2. Options
      #34
      philologos
      Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


      santing wrote: »
      The septuagint doesn't use the word "baptism" here (or in similar places) but translates "wash his body." It is not clear if a bath / immersion was required. This ritual washing did become the Mikveh at some stage, but I don't think it was associated with the word baptism.

      Surely Jesus could have put a new meaning on the use of mikveh as an initiation ceremony as opposed to making someone ritually clean. Jesus also did similar things in relation to the Jewish law on revenge so I don't see why not in this circumstance. The practices do seem particularly similar.

      As for the dating:
      Wikipedia wrote:
      The Essenes were a Jewish religious group that flourished from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD.


    3. Options
      #35
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Folks, leaving the born/born again debate aside for a while, how does someone claim that baptism is symbolic in light of the two verses below?
      Acts 2:38 But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

      Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name.

      Does anyone deny scripture when it clearly says that baptism washes away sins and gives us the gift of the Holy Spirit?

      Let me be clear by saying that baptism would have no effect if it weren't for the shedding of Jesus' blood. In baptism our souls are cleansed of sin and we are made just in the sight of God. Our souls then become worthy for the Holy Spirit to dwell therein (until we commit a mortal sin).

      God bless,
      Noel.


    4. Options
      #36
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Nobody? Is everyone fed up of my defenses of the Catholic faith?


    5. Advertisement
    6. Options
      #37
      CerebralCortex
      Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


      kelly1 wrote: »
      Nobody? Is everyone fed up of my defenses of the Catholic faith?

      Are you serious?


    7. Options
      #38
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      CerebralCortex wrote: »
      Are you serious?
      Yes. I've asked a valid question and all I want to do is have an open and honest debate about baptism. To me it's an important question. I believe that many people accept baptism as symbolic becuase they have been taught that it's only symbolic. I'm only asking people to challenge that assumption. Fair enough?


    8. Options
      #39
      robindch
      Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


      kelly1 wrote: »
      Is everyone fed up of my defenses of the Catholic faith?
      Not at all -- please continue! I do find your defense interesting, though obviously enough I agree with few, if any, of them.


    9. Options
      #40
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      robindch wrote: »
      Not at all -- please continue! I do find your defense interesting, though obviously enough I agree with few, if any, of them.
      Presumably on the basis that I'm talking about religious matters? Or is my argument flawed?


    10. Options
      #41
      Tomk1
      Registered Users Posts: 776 ✭✭✭Tomk1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      The Bible teaches that man is created in the image of God. God manifests Himself to mankind in the Persons of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Likewise, mankind is composed of a body, soul, and spirit.

      Your god was a sprit-form definably not what i look like, for us to be the image of your god, then your god would be the image of us, so did your god have genitalia, if so why?
      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      The reason why you need to be "spiritually" born is because you have never been spiritually born to begin with. So when the Bible speaks of being "born again," it actually means "born for the second time." You were born physically into this world, but you were born without the Spirit of God in your soul (spiritually dead).

      I was baptised as a child, now as an adult I would of preferred if this ritual was never carried out. Can I unsubscribe the spirit-of-god, ie become unbaptised.
      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      God never forces anyone to accept Christ as their Savior, He simply offers a warm invitation to anyone who wants to have their sins forgiven and go to Heaven. Salvation is a free gift (Romans 5:15), paid for by the precious blood of Jesus Christ (1st Peter 1:18,19). We must accept God's gift of eternal life or it WILL be forever forfeited when we leave this world (die).

      Yeah say that to those that died during the Catholic Inquisition.


    11. Advertisement
    12. Options
      #42
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      Tomk1 wrote: »
      Your god was a sprit-form definably not what i look like, for us to be the image of your god, then your god would be the image of us, so did your god have genitalia, if so why?.
      When Christ walked on earth he took on all the physical characteristics of a male and would obviously have had genitalia. When Jesus came into the world he came to seek and save the lost and not to raise a family.
      Tomk1 wrote: »
      I was baptised as a child, now as an adult I would of preferred if this ritual was never carried out. Can I unsubscribe the spirit-of-god, ie become unbaptised.
      I was also baptised as a child into the Roman Catholic Church against my will. I now believe that one should be baptised only after they have consiously become a Christian i.e. after the age of reason. Christians are supposed to be baptized as soon as possible after they are saved. In Bible times they were usually baptized the same day. You can accept or reject Christ at any time in your life but you choose your own destiny.
      .
      Tomk1 wrote: »
      Yeah say that to those that died during the Catholic Inquisition..
      I don't speak for the Catholic Church.


    13. Options
      #43
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      I was also baptised as a child into the Roman Catholic Church against my will.
      What happened, did the priest pin you down while pouring water over your head? Did nobody listen to your objections?


    14. Options
      #44
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      What happened, did the priest pin you down while pouring water over your head? Did nobody listen to your objections?
      They probably herd me scream my head off in fear!!!:eek:


    15. Options
      #45
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Tomk1 wrote: »
      Your god was a sprit-form definably not what i look like, for us to be the image of your god, then your god would be the image of us, so did your god have genitalia, if so why?
      Hey, the new kid on the block is having a go at us. Is that your best shot?

      Our souls are like God, not our bodies. God is spirit.
      Tomk1 wrote: »
      I was baptised as a child, now as an adult I would of preferred if this ritual was never carried out. Can I unsubscribe the spirit-of-god, ie become unbaptised.
      No sorry, you can't. The mark of baptism on the soul is indelible. Anyway if you believe baptism has no effect, how can you undo nothing? Do you belive in God or not?

      I'm sorry to hear you've moved over to the dark side.


    16. Options
      #46
      Black Swan
      Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,220 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


      kelly1 wrote: »
      I'm not adding anything to scripture. Mark 16:16 clearly states that faith AND baptism are required for salvation. How can you read it any other way?
      So a child that dies in childbirth will not meet these two conditions for salvation? (according to Mark 16:16)


    17. Options
      #47
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Blue_Lagoon wrote: »
      So a child that dies in childbirth will not meet these two conditions for salvation? (according to Mark 16:16)
      Nobody knows. Jesus might baptise the child in order to be fair. Obviously the child can't have faith so God, I'm sure, would take this into account.


    18. Options
      #48
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      Hey, the new kid on the block is having a go at us. Is that your best shot?

      Our souls are like God, not our bodies. God is spirit.

      No sorry, you can't. The mark of baptism on the soul is indelible. Anyway if you believe baptism has no effect, how can you undo nothing? Do you belive in God or not?

      I'm sorry to hear you've moved over to the dark side.
      The Baptism of the Roman Catholic Church has no effect simply because it is not carried out with accordance to the scriptures thus making it null and void. I would recommend any new Christian convert who has conciously made his mind up to follow Christ to get baptised by full emmersion, many Christian churches have the correct facilities and times designated for this service.


    19. Options
      #49
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      The Baptism of the Roman Catholic Church has no effect simply because it is not carried out with accordance to the scriptures thus making it null and void. I would recommend any new Christian convert who has conciously made his mind up to follow Christ to get baptised by full emmersion, many Christian churches have the correct facilities and times designated for this service.
      I'm sure the Catholic Church isn't the only one to baptise without immersion. Are you seriously telling me that multiple billions of people who weren't baptised by immersion since the time of the apostles are all damned? Full immersion is a tradition and nothing more.


    20. Options
      #50
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      I'm sure the Catholic Church isn't the only one to baptise without immersion. Are you seriously telling that multiple billions of people who were baptise by immersion since the time of the apostles are all damned? Full immersion is a tradition and nothing more.
      Yes many of the protestant churches such as the Luthern and Anglican have inherrited infant baptism from the Catholic Church, many offer the choice of both forms.

      Baptism is an ordinance and is not necessary for salvation, the good thief on the cross never got baptised. The ordinance of baptism is a public symbol. When a person chooses to be baptized they are giving a public witness that they believe in Christ and are committed to following him.


    21. Options
      #51
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      Baptism is an ordinance and is not necessary for salvation, the good thief on the cross never got baptised. The ordinance of baptism is a public symbol. When a person chooses to be baptized they are giving a public witness that they believe in Christ and are committed to following him.
      Baptism with water is the normal form by which someone becomes a Christian. It is clear from scripture that baptism washes away sin and gives the gift of the Holy Spirit. Do you deny this?

      Mark 16:16 also makes it clear that baptism is required to be saved. But maybe you don't realize that there is baptism by desire (Thief on the cross) and baptism by blood (martyrs who died for Christ).
      Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (both are required to be saved)


    22. Advertisement
    23. Options
      #52
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      Baptism is the normal form by which someone becomes a Christian. It is clear from scripture that baptism washes away sin and gives the gift of the Holy Spirit. Do you deny this?).
      Yes of course I deny this. When a person repents of their sin and accepts Christ in their life only then do they receive the Holy Spirit and forgiveness for their sin. Baptism is an outward symbol of an inward grace when we believe in and commit ourselves to following Christ.
      kelly1 wrote: »
      Mark 16:16 also makes it clear that baptism is required to be saved. But maybe you don't realize that there is baptism by desire (Thief on the cross) and baptism by blood (martyrs who died for Christ).
      Mark 16:16 is frequently used by baptismal regenerationists Ie the Catholic and some protestant churches to show that baptism is necessary for salvation. It says he who believes and is baptized will be saved. Therefore, they conclude that baptism is a necessary part of becoming saved. But, does this verse prove that baptism is necessary for salvation? Not at all.

      Mark 16:16 does not say that baptism is a requirement for salvation. Baptism is simply a public demonstration of the inner work of regeneration. This is why the rest of the verse says, "but he who does not to believe will be damned." Mark 16:16 focuses on the issue of belief, not baptism.


    24. Options
      #53
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      Yes of course I deny this. When a person repents of their sin and accepts Christ in their life only then do they receive the Holy Spirit and forgiveness for their sin.
      OK. Would you also say that these verses are false?:
      Acts 2:38 But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

      Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name.

      Are you not picking and choosing scripture to suit your beliefs?


    25. Options
      #54
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      OK. Would you also say that these verses are false?:?
      No. no part of scripture is false, but reading extract out of context without completing the remainder of chapter would definitally give one a false interpritation of scripture.
      kelly1 wrote: »
      Are you not picking and choosing scripture to suit your beliefs?
      No, show me one scripture where it tells us that baptism is a soley necessary required for salvation other than faith in Christ. Show us one scripture where infant babies are sprinkled, show us one scripture where "holy water" is used.


    26. Options
      #55
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      No. no part of scripture is false, but reading extract out of context without completing the remainder of chapter would definitally give one a false interpritation of scripture.
      It's simple. The two verses I quoted from Acts show that baptism remits sin. Do you deny this?
      And if so, why do you deny it?
      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      No, show me one scripture where it tells us that baptism is a soley necessary required for salvation other than faith in Christ.
      I didn't say baptism alone is sufficent for adults but I believe it is for infants. If faith is always required for salvation, wouldn't this mean that babies who die can't be saved because babies can't have faith? In the case of adults, it would be worthless to get baptised without faith.
      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      Show us one scripture where infant babies are sprinkled, show us one scripture where "holy water" is used.
      In scripture it's not always clear exactly how the baptism is performed. People were baptised in houses and I imagine full immersion could have been problematic. Did they have baths in those days?


    27. Options
      #56
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      It's simple. The two verses I quoted from Acts show that baptism remits sin. Do you deny this?
      And if so, why do you deny it?
      People are saved (and get to go to heaven) by believing that Jesus is the Christ and putting their faith in Him. Baptism alone does not save. However, salvation (being saved) and baptism are always tied together as I mentioned before in Acts those that got "saved" were almostr baptised in the immediate after.
      kelly1 wrote: »
      I didn't say baptism alone is sufficent for adults but I believe it is for infants. If faith is always required for salvation, wouldn't this mean that babies who die can't be saved because babies can't have faith? In the case of adults, it would be worthless to get baptised without faith.
      I feel that Infant baptism is probably one of the most dangerous docterines (Along with OSAS) because it gives those that are baptised the false illusion that they are continuously saved. I know for a fact that I was never saved as a growing up Catholic because I never made that public profession of faith before I got baptised.
      kelly1 wrote: »
      In scripture it's not always clear exactly how the baptism is performed. People were baptised in houses and I imagine full immersion could have been problematic. Did they have baths in those days?
      Scripture is very clear about baptism. Rivers were popular for carrying out baptisms. Christ himself was baptised in the Jordan river by submergance as he came "out of the water", John the Baptist also baptised in the Jordan. I dont think anyone would have been baptised in private houses. I do believe the early Catholic Churches had facilities in churches for full immersion but this was changed down through the centuries.


    28. Options
      #57
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      People are saved (and get to go to heaven) by believing that Jesus is the Christ and putting their faith in Him. Baptism alone does not save.
      Let me just focus on the remission of sins through baptism for a while. I'll come back to the salvation of infants later.

      You seem to have side-stepped my question, which is:

      Do you deny that baptism remits sin as told in Acts 2:38 and 22:16?
      If you do deny this, why do you deny it?


    29. Options
      #58
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      Let me just focus on the remission of sins through baptism for a while. I'll come back to the salvation of infants later.

      You seem to have side-stepped my question, which is:

      Do you deny that baptism remits sin as told in Acts 2:38 and 22:16?
      If you do deny this, why do you deny it?
      Yes again I totally deny that Baptism clenses us from Original sin. I believe all mankind has sinned and fallen short of God. WE have inherrited this sin from Adam. Again we must be consious of repenting and asking God for forgiveness of that sin and be willing to turn away from it . By getting baptised without first professing our faith and asking God for forgiveness is only giving us a meaningless splash of water.


    30. Options
      #59
      BrianCalgary
      Registered Users Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭BrianCalgary


      Tomk1 wrote: »
      Your god was a sprit-form definably not what i look like, for us to be the image of your god, then your god would be the image of us, so did your god have genitalia, if so why?
      .

      Tomk1, this shows you absolute ignorance of what the 'image of God' means.

      Are you interested in knowing the answer or not?

      Because by your post you have no desire to learn, which could be interpretated as a violation fo charter rules 3 and/or 7.

      Careful


    31. Options
      #60
      kelly1
      Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


      Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
      Yes again I totally deny that Baptism clenses us from Original sin. I believe all mankind has sinned and fallen short of God. WE have inherrited this sin from Adam. Again we must be consious of repenting and asking God for forgiveness of that sin and be willing to turn away from it . By getting baptised without first professing our faith and asking God for forgiveness is only giving us a meaningless splash of water.
      You deny it despite the fact that it is clearly written in scripture? Seems like you're ignoring parts you don't like. Is that so?

      In the case of an adult, you need to have faith in Christ and a willingness to repent before being baptised. Agreed?

      You say it is faith that cleanses us of sin and I say it's baptism. If that's the case, why bother with baptism? What's the point of it if all you have to do is accept Christ publicly? Do you think baptism could be omitted since you think it's only symbolic?


    32. Advertisement
    33. Options
      #61
      Run_to_da_hills
      Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


      kelly1 wrote: »
      You deny it despite the fact that it is clearly written in scripture? Seems like you're ignoring parts you don't like. Is that so?

      In the case of an adult, you need to have faith in Christ and a willingness to repent before being baptised. Agreed?

      You say it is faith that cleanses us of sin and I say it's baptism. If that's the case, why bother with baptism? What's the point of it if all you have to do is accept Christ publicly? Do you think baptism could be omitted since you think it's only symbolic?
      In the case of all Christians we need to have faith in Christ and a willingness to repent before being baptised, Yes I agree on this one. . This is clearly spoken of in Acts 2 38. "Then Peter said unto them, repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins. You must remember that with Infant Baptism the most important part of this verse ie the "Repent" part is ommitted because the kid is too young to understand.

      I cannot see the logic of any infants being condemmed to hell because they had not reached the age of reason to decide for themselves.


    Advertisement