authentic Jews need reply...

[JudaicChristian]

John 3: 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit[a] gives birth to spirit.

If no one else has paid attention to what you have said, I have. Baptism is very important.

 

[Desert Rose]

Appreciate all the kind explanations, friends, thank you so very much. Makes perfect sense!

 

[ContraMundum]

You also are pretty close.

I'm 100% correct on this.

A sacrament, such as baptism, is an outward and visible sign of an inner and spiritual grace. The baptism fulfills what is already a reality, just as the ordination of a priest fulfills what God has already spoken in relation to that person's priesthood.

Therefore, it is possible to be born a Christian, in a Christian family, and to be then baptised as a sacrament of that Christianity.

I don't agree at all- in the BCP it is clear that the rite of Baptism is a sacrament of the second birth. You enter God's family by baptism, not by natural birth. Read the scriptures, the rite and the rubrics in the BCP and all that and you will see it. You should know that.

Again, the pattern is Judaism. A Jewish boy does not become Jewish when he is circumcised, but is such by virtue of having a Jewish mother. The circumcision is sacramental; the outward expression of the already existing spiritual relationship between him and his God.

Your correlation is not quite correct, but you understand the types and shadows here. A Jewish boy will be Jewish even if he is not circumcised (after all, Jewish girls are Jewish and do not receive such signs of the Covenant). Jesus is very clear- you must be born again. You are not born a Christian even if into a Christian family in a "Christian" country.

 

[Heber]

I'm 100% correct on this.



I don't agree at all- in the BCP it is clear that the rite of Baptism is a sacrament of the second birth. You enter God's family by baptism, not by natural birth. Read the scriptures, the rite and the rubrics in the BCP and all that and you will see it. You should know that.



Your correlation is not quite correct, but you understand the types and shadows here. A Jewish boy will be Jewish even if he is not circumcised (after all, Jewish girls are Jewish and do not receive such signs of the Covenant). Jesus is very clear- you must be born again. You are not born a Christian even if into a Christian family in a "Christian" country.

Precisely. Plenty of scriptural evidence says the same. It is what makes infant baptism, on many occasions, a real nonsense because the Scriptural injunction is to repent of your sins, believe in your heart and confess with your lips that Yeshua HaMashiach is G_d. How many babies can do those things (even if we substitute the name Jesus)? Oh, we can argue that baptism is an outward sign of an inward work of G_d to justify a few drops of plain water on a baby's head! The work of G_d is always there in our lives - he just gives us the right to acknowledge it or not. When we are old enough to make that decision, and if we choose to acknowledge it, we get baptised - this is clearly not a justification for babies to be done, though. There is no record of John the Baptist asking for babies to be brought for him to 'do' in the Jordan, is there?

In any case, there must be millions of what I call baptised pagans roaming the world today. How many parents have made promises to G_d in relation to the baptism of little 'Jimmy', helped by un-discerning ministers, that they have no intention of keeping? If they had kept them and brought their child up in the church, the church would not be dead on its feet today! Their promises are mainly some sort of insurance policy, or because grandma (who hasn't been to church for decades) wants little 'Jimmy' done because that is the right thing - not from a conviction of what G_d wants to do in their lives, and those of their offspring. There are, clearly, many millions more baptised people in the world today than would ever fit in all the church buildings in the world -why? Because of sloppy sentimentality, faulty theology and a lack of true Biblical doctrine on the issue (and on many other issues, too).

Then, of course, there is Nicodemus... oi vey, my son - you want that I should go back in my mother's womb and be born again! :o :o

 

[Catherineanne]

I'm 100% correct on this.

The Holy Father has spoken ex cathedra?

I don't agree at all- in the BCP it is clear that the rite of Baptism is a sacrament of the second birth.

That is what I said. It is a sacrament. A sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inner and spiritual grace. It does not CAUSE that grace, it is an outward and visible sign of it.

You are not born a Christian even if into a Christian family in a "Christian" country.

I disagree. You can think what you like, but having an opinion does not make you infallible, even if you think it does.

Good luck with that.

 

[Ivy]

Are you infallible when you assess someone else as being "pretty close"?

 

[ContraMundum]

Precisely. Plenty of scriptural evidence says the same. It is what makes infant baptism, on many occasions, a real nonsense because the Scriptural injunction is to repent of your sins, believe in your heart and confess with your lips that Yeshua HaMashiach is G_d. How many babies can do those things (even if we substitute the name Jesus)? Oh, we can argue that baptism is an outward sign of an inward work of G_d to justify a few drops of plain water on a baby's head! The work of G_d is always there in our lives - he just gives us the right to acknowledge it or not. When we are old enough to make that decision, and if we choose to acknowledge it, we get baptised - this is clearly not a justification for babies to be done, though. There is no record of John the Baptist asking for babies to be brought for him to 'do' in the Jordan, is there?

In any case, there must be millions of what I call baptised pagans roaming the world today. How many parents have made promises to G_d in relation to the baptism of little 'Jimmy', helped by un-discerning ministers, that they have no intention of keeping? If they had kept them and brought their child up in the church, the church would not be dead on its feet today! Their promises are mainly some sort of insurance policy, or because grandma (who hasn't been to church for decades) wants little 'Jimmy' done because that is the right thing - not from a conviction of what G_d wants to do in their lives, and those of their offspring. There are, clearly, many millions more baptised people in the world today than would ever fit in all the church buildings in the world -why? Because of sloppy sentimentality, faulty theology and a lack of true Biblical doctrine on the issue (and on many other issues, too).

Then, of course, there is Nicodemus... oi vey, my son - you want that I should go back in my mother's womb and be born again! :o :o

Of course, you know our side can easily build a watertight scriptural case for infant baptism if we want to- the church has been doing it since the beginning and it absolutely smashes the "adults only" theory (it all boils down to who you think baptises- God or men. I think God, you think men). But, you and I both know this is not the place or the thread to do this- and we also both know that we are both convinced of where we stand and won't be changing our positions. I know why I believe as I do, and I am not an "undiscerning minister" with "sloppy mentality" or faulty theology". I'm proud to say that the children of Christian parents who presented them to me for baptism are all growing up in the faith and doing quite nicely, thank you very much!

 

[Heber]

Of course, you know our side can easily build a watertight scriptural case for infant baptism if we want to- the church has been doing it since the beginning and it absolutely smashes the "adults only" theory (it all boils down to who you think baptises- God or men. I think God, you think men). But, you and I both know this is not the place or the thread to do this- and we also both know that we are both convinced of where we stand and won't be changing our positions. I know why I believe as I do, and I am not an "undiscerning minister" with "sloppy mentality" or faulty theology". I'm proud to say that the children of Christian parents who presented them to me for baptism are all growing up in the faith and doing quite nicely, thank you very much!

CM - I was not attacking you, or your theology, I have no problem with those who baptise with integrity - whether for children or adults, but I am equally sure we both know ministers for whom baptism might just as well be done with a sprinkle from a hose pipe on a quiet Sunday afternoon!

 

[ContraMundum]

The Holy Father has spoken ex cathedra?

No, a person in agreement with the church has spoken- that is all- but that is sufficuent for this discussion.

That is what I said. It is a sacrament. A sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inner and spiritual grace. It does not CAUSE that grace, it is an outward and visible sign of it.

Can I recommend some Anglican books on the sacraments to you? Please check the 39 Articles if you are that way inclined. Art. 25 and 27 in particular.

Again, this is not the place for this conversation. Let's stop there.

 

[ContraMundum]

CM - I was not attacking you, or your theology, I have no problem with those who baptise with integrity - whether for children or adults, but I am equally sure we both know ministers for whom baptism might just as well be done with a sprinkle from a hose pipe on a quiet Sunday afternoon!

OK. Yep- I have heard of those types but am fortunate to say that I don't personally know anyone like that. One fella once said to me "the problem with the mission fields in the old days was that they may as well have baptised with firehoses fired into crowds, hitting even the cattle". You get my drift.