Doctrine that Adds to Scripture

Status
Not open for further replies.

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The best answer is that water baptism has nothing to do with salvation!

It has nothing to do with what Jesus could or could not have done, grace withstanding. He was promised heaven because of his confessing of Jesus Christ and it proves that baptism has nothing to do with being saved.
So you are saying that the Bible is wrong then?
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Question, was or was not St. Paul baptized?


What is the point???

Is there a Bible reference showing us that the 1st Pope, Peter was baptized???

Isn't that a hoot. The Catholics argue for baptism to play a part in being saved and the so called 1st Pope was not baptized..

Now does that mean that by your arguments that Peter was not save???????
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Baptism is not a Christian invention. It originated in the Torah. Immersion only indicates a change in status of the person or object.

Does the Torah also mention that it is for "cleansing and purification".
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So you are saying that the Bible is wrong then?

Think for just a moment. It is interesting to note that Jesus did not baptize.

John 4:1-2
"The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but His disciples".

If water baptism were necessary for salvation, wouldn't Jesus have baptized? Jesus presented Himself to the Jews as their Messiah with signs and Messianic miracles, but He did not baptize them.
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If water baptism were necessary for salvation, wouldn't Jesus have baptized?
If it's not necessary for salvation, why didn't He tell His followers to stop baptizing people since doing so was clearly upsetting to the Pharisees?
 
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Think for just a moment. It is interesting to note that Jesus did not baptize.

John 4:1-2
"The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but His disciples".

If water baptism were necessary for salvation, wouldn't Jesus have baptized? Jesus presented Himself to the Jews as their Messiah with signs and Messianic miracles, but He did not baptize them.
But His disciples did, don't forget that part. Also don't forget that He mandated it in Mark 16:16 as necessary for salvation. Again you have Acts 2:38 as well, and let us not forget our Lord's discussion with Nicodemus in John Ch 3. Then you have St Peter in his 1st letter explicitly saying that baptism does save. (2Pet 3:20-21).

If baptism wasn't necessary then why did St. Paul baptize those who were John the Baptists disciples, in the Name of Jesus? These people were already believers in Jesus, so why baptize them? (Acts 19: 1-7)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What is the point???

Is there a Bible reference showing us that the 1st Pope, Peter was baptized???

Isn't that a hoot. The Catholics argue for baptism to play a part in being saved and the so called 1st Pope was not baptized..

Now does that mean that by your arguments that Peter was not save???????
How do you know that he wasn't baptized? No where in Scripture does it claim that he or the rest of the 12 were not baptized?

And another thing, if baptism wasn't necessary why even have the Sacrament? Why impose folks to do something that IYO has no benefit to the recipient?
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
How do you know that he wasn't baptized? No where in Scripture does it claim that he or the rest of the 12 were not baptized?

And another thing, if baptism wasn't necessary why even have the Sacrament? Why impose folks to do something that IYO has no benefit to the recipient?

How do you know that he was?????/

There is NO Bible record of Peter being baptized.

Why is there a Sacrement??? Because the Catholic church imposed it my dear brother.
It is just another one of the many non-Biblical things the RCC commands you to do.

Your Catholic church says.............
"The Sacrament of Baptism, the first of the three sacraments of initiation, is also the first of the seven sacraments in the Catholic Church. It removes the guilt and effects of Original Sin and incorporates the baptized into the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ on earth. We cannot be saved without Baptism."

The only one that Protestants accept are Eucharist (The Lord’s Supper). Our reason for rejecting the other six is that Protestants are convinced that there is no biblical basis for them, as sacraments. That is to say, though there is a biblical basis for the ideas of confirmation, marriage, ordination, anointing with oil and repentance, there is no biblical basis for considering these matters sacraments.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
But His disciples did, don't forget that part. Also don't forget that He mandated it in Mark 16:16 as necessary for salvation. Again you have Acts 2:38 as well, and let us not forget our Lord's discussion with Nicodemus in John Ch 3. Then you have St Peter in his 1st letter explicitly saying that baptism does save. (2Pet 3:20-21).

If baptism wasn't necessary then why did St. Paul baptize those who were John the Baptists disciples, in the Name of Jesus? These people were already believers in Jesus, so why baptize them? (Acts 19: 1-7)

I bet you are glad you asked these question. You see, this is how we learn the Scriptures.

You see, you are in error on this subject. I say that with all due respect and not to argue with you.

In fact, there are really two mysteries. One is whether or not the apostles were baptized at all. Another mystery is why the conversion of the apostles is not even mentioned.

Please do yourself a favor and do the research. YOU look it up and do not trust me.You will not find a Biblical recorded of the apostles being baptized or their conversion.

Now again, you have exhorted Peter as your 1st Catholic Pastor and there is NO record of his baptism.
According then to you own sacraments and tradition your Pope was not saved because he was not baptized.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If it's not necessary for salvation, why didn't He tell His followers to stop baptizing people since doing so was clearly upsetting to the Pharisees?

He called them vipers and liars, do you really think He cared whether or not He was upsetting them?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I don't think so, especially considering that the New Testament explicitly teaches the necessity of Baptism.

Where????

Post it for me please.

No do not misunderstand me. I believe that every single lost sinner should get baptized, however that does not mean that our salvation is based on the act itself my friend.

1 Cor 1:17: “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, … he then makes it clear v.18 “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”

So baptizing was not equated with the gospel preached to save people from their sins. Paul says what the gospel is later on in this same letter:

Heb. 9:22..................
The whole Bible proclaims a blood sacrifice for sin, this is God’s provision “without shedding of blood is NO remission of sin".

Jesus said in Matt. 26:28...........
"For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins".

Redemption, and the forgiveness of sins comes only from the blood of Jesus and NOT WATER!

Eph. 1:7..............
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace".

Eph. 1:11-14: ...............
“… we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory
In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.”


Rom 8:9 .............
But “you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.”

Rom 8:16:..........
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God”.
 
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
How do you know that he was?????/

There is NO Bible record of Peter being baptized.
There is no record of Peter having a mother either, so since be Bible didn't record that Peter had a mother, are we suppose to believe that he didn't? Not every single historical fact is recorded in Scripture. Some things we just have to be intelligent enough to conclude.

Why is there a Sacrement??? Because the Catholic church imposed it my dear brother.
It is just another one of the many non-Biblical things the RCC commands you to do.

Your Catholic church says.............
"The Sacrament of Baptism, the first of the three sacraments of initiation, is also the first of the seven sacraments in the Catholic Church. It removes the guilt and effects of Original Sin and incorporates the baptized into the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ on earth. We cannot be saved without Baptism."
Thanks for pointing out that the Catholic Church has always been around for 2000 years.

The only one that Protestants accept are Eucharist (The Lord’s Supper). Our reason for rejecting the other six is that Protestants are convinced that there is no biblical basis for them, as sacraments. That is to say, though there is a biblical basis for the ideas of confirmation, marriage, ordination, anointing with oil and repentance, there is no biblical basis for considering these matters sacraments.
Hum... There are quite a few Protestants on these forums and elsewhere that would laugh at this assertion. The far majority (if not all depending on how you define the word) of Protestants view Baptism as a Sacrament. Radicals are the ones that do not.
 
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I bet you are glad you asked these question. You see, this is how we learn the Scriptures.

You see, you are in error on this subject. I say that with all due respect and not to argue with you.

In fact, there are really two mysteries. One is whether or not the apostles were baptized at all. Another mystery is why the conversion of the apostles is not even mentioned.

Please do yourself a favor and do the research. YOU look it up and do not trust me.You will not find a Biblical recorded of the apostles being baptized or their conversion.

Now again, you have exhorted Peter as your 1st Catholic Pastor and there is NO record of his baptism.
According then to you own sacraments and tradition your Pope was not saved because he was not baptized.
So when Jesus said to the Apostles to come follow Him, and they did; was this not the beginning of their conversion to Him? Or are you claiming that the Apostles had no free will? What would that say about Judas Iscariot then if they didn't have free will? If though you don't claim that Jesus took them to Himself against their wills, then the only conclusion is that they were converted to Him and His teachings. If this then is the case why wouldn't one conclude that they were also baptized by Him, although there is no record of it? In fact if Jesus didn't teach them how to baptize, then how would they have known how to baptize?
 
Upvote 0

Erose

Newbie
Jul 2, 2010
9,008
1,470
✟67,771.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Where????

Post it for me please.

No do not misunderstand me. I believe that every single lost sinner should get baptized, however that does not mean that our salvation is based on the act itself my friend.

1 Cor 1:17: “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, … he then makes it clear v.18 “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”

So baptizing was not equated with the gospel preached to save people from their sins. Paul says what the gospel is later on in this same letter:

Heb. 9:22..................
The whole Bible proclaims a blood sacrifice for sin, this is God’s provision “without shedding of blood is NO remission of sin".

Jesus said in Matt. 26:28...........
"For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins".

Redemption, and the forgiveness of sins comes only from the blood of Jesus and NOT WATER!

Eph. 1:7..............
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace".

Eph. 1:11-14: ...............
“… we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory
In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.”


Rom 8:9 .............
But “you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.”

Rom 8:16:..........
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God”.
From Jesus' own mouth: Mk 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. I don't know how you get past this one. This says that one believes AND is baptized will be saved. "And" means that both are required, not either or or just one of them.

How about from our first Pope? 1st Peter 3:18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Is not receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit synonymous with being saved? Can one be saved without the Holy Spirit?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
For it hath been signified unto me, my brethren, of you, by them that are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. [12] Now this I say, that every one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of Cephas; and I of Christ. [13] Is Christ divided? Was Paul then crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul? [14] I give God thanks, that I baptized none of you but Crispus and Caius; [15] Lest any should say that you were baptized in my name.

it seems like baptism was common.

But, if it is essential to salvation, as Catholicism teaches, why did Paul only baptize two?

Why, as one of the hardest work evangelists, refuse to do as Jesus said?

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Major1
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.