Baptism is NOT symbolic

Philip · Mar 10, 2005

LLC3GUYS said:
Lastly, I gave you the avenue of searching on the internet for the titles, page #'s, cuniforms, heiroglyphics, parchments, or any other form you may desire. Do the work yourself, if you are really open to the proof and the truth.

You made a claim that the phrase was colloquial. The burden of proof rests on your shoulders. Can you provide that proof? Or are the rest of us not worthy of your special knowledge?

Qoheleth · Mar 10, 2005

the thief on the cross wasnt baptised...in water...but in the holy spirit..look where it got him...

And that is why Confessional Lutherans say that baptism is necessary yet not absolutely necessary.

Q

Albion · Mar 10, 2005

Qoheleth said:
And that is why Confessional Lutherans say that baptism is necessary yet not absolutely necessary.

Q

That's right. There is nothing strange about the idea that God establishes a system for our benefit and commands it...but in his wisdom may make an exception (Good Thief) that doesn't change anything for the rest of us. How illogical, it seems to me, to make one case override everything else we know to go by. This wasn't a teaching, a doctrine, that was compromised by Jesus. It was merely a response to one person about his destiny, and it came from God (Jesus) himself. Besides, we aren't absolutely certain what the word spoken to Dismas mean.

But yet, some say that no one should bother being baptised, either for the benefit some say it grants to us or the fulfillment of a divine command others say baptism is all about. Not for mankind in general, all because of one forecast to the Good Thief that is used to nullify all the rest of Scripture dealing with baptism.

S Walch · Mar 10, 2005

One can choose to be baptised.

No one should be forced to be baptised.

Everyone who is recorded as being baptised in the New Testiment chose to be baptised.

Wild_Fan4Christ · Mar 10, 2005

This has been mentioned before but overlooked.

What is a Sacrament as used in the Baptism? It can also be the "Mysteries" of our faith. But let's look at the Latin word "Sacramentum," which means "sacred oath."

Think about this? Is an oath something you want to break with God? And don't sit here and tell me a baby doesn't know what is going on when your church doesn't follow the sacraments other than maybe two or three. And at that, they aren't followed the way you would when taking an "oath" as many of you claim it is merely a "symbol." Not something I want to chance under oath with God.

The Catholic Church also looks at the Sacraments as this...
"An outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible grace." - St. Augustine, Council of Hippo.

There are seven Sacraments in the Catholic Church. Luther held on to three of those: the Eucharist, Baptism, and Confession.

Ok, you are probably asking me, what happened to Marriage in all of this? I don't know, why don't you go back and ask Luther. But I would take a guess that as you only look at Baptism as a "symbol." You do the same with Marriage in your church(s) Does this explain why there are so many divorces today? I don't know, but taking the Sacrament of Marriage should not be taken lightly if you regard it only as a "symbol." It is an oath you are taking with your husband or wife AND with God as you are truly made as "one" into the communion of the family in the Church of God.

Again, those who are equating Baptism as "symbolic," you are breaking an oath with God in doing so. And especially those who get baptised more than once after changing church's and after getting saved again. This is what is called "feel good theology." If it feels good, sure let's do it. I will say it again, getting baptised more than once is a disgrace to God.

I only ask those who reject Baptism calling it symbolic to examin their conscience and look at their church. An oath is not to be joked around with. You don't like to lie as we are all good Christians here. Why would you want to lie to God?

SPALATIN · Mar 10, 2005

Wild_Fan4Christ said:
This has been mentioned before but overlooked.

What is a Sacrament as used in the Baptism? It can also be the "Mysteries" of our faith. But let's look at the Latin word "Sacramentum," which means "sacred oath."

Think about this? Is an oath something you want to break with God? And don't sit here and tell me a baby doesn't know what is going on when your church doesn't follow the sacraments other than maybe two or three. And at that, they aren't followed the way you would when taking an "oath" as many of you claim it is merely a "symbol." Not something I want to chance under oath with God.

The Catholic Church also looks at the Sacraments as this...
"An outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible grace." - St. Augustine, Council of Hippo.

There are seven Sacraments in the Catholic Church. Luther held on to three of those: the Eucharist, Baptism, and Confession.

Actually Lutherans themselves have only 2 of them: Baptism and Holy Communion (Eucharist). Confession would be a sacrament but there is no physical host involved.

Wild_Fan4Christ said:
Ok, you are probably asking me, what happened to Marriage in all of this? I don't know, why don't you go back and ask Luther. But I would take a guess that as you only look at Baptism as a "symbol." You do the same with Marriage in your church(s) Does this explain why there are so many divorces today? I don't know, but taking the Sacrament of Marriage should not be taken lightly if you regard it only as a "symbol." It is an oath you are taking with your husband or wife AND with God as you are truly made as "one" into the communion of the family in the Church of God.

Marriage, Last Rites, Holy Unction, Confession

These four while beneficial to some are not beneficial to all. Baptism is beneficial to all because all who witness a baptism are taken back to their own Baptism and reminded of what took place. Holy Communion because many are taking the Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour, but Marriage, while a sacred oath is only for the 2 people involved and not for the witnesses. Last Rites involve only the person dying. Holy Unction involves only the persons anointing the sick and the sick themselves, but not anyone outside of the group. Confession the way the Roman Catholics practice it only benefits the person confessing and receiving absolution.

Confirmation, as far as the Lutheran Church is concerned is a ritual bringing the catechumen to the status of adult in the church and giving them the right to participate in the Sacrament of the Altar.

Wild_Fan4Christ said:
Again, those who are equating Baptism as "symbolic," you are breaking an oath with God in doing so. And especially those who get baptised more than once after changing church's and after getting saved again. This is what is called "feel good theology." If it feels good, sure let's do it. I will say it again, getting baptised more than once is a disgrace to God.

I only ask those who reject Baptism calling it symbolic to examin their conscience and look at their church. An oath is not to be joked around with. You don't like to lie as we are all good Christians here. Why would you want to lie to God?

The rest of this I agree with.

S Walch · Mar 10, 2005

People here aren't rejecting baptism as a whole.

They are rejecting that children should be baptised when the Child himself hasn't chosen to be baptised.

When one is baptised as a adult - you have chosen to get baptised.

That choice isn't made for you. You make it youself.

Adult baptism and baby baptism are different in every aspect.

Philip · Mar 10, 2005

S Walch said:
People here aren't rejecting baptism as a whole.

They are rejecting that children should be baptised when the Child himself hasn't chosen to be baptised.

When one is baptised as a adult - you have chosen to get baptised.

That choice isn't made for you. You make it youself.

Adult baptism and baby baptism are different in every aspect.

Wouldn't some argue that no one can choose to be baptized -- that that 'choice' is only possible through God?

S Walch · Mar 10, 2005

Baptism, especially in the New testiment - was carried out when someone believed in Christ Jesus, then they were baptised publicly whilst making that confession to those who were there.

That is different to baby baptism.

As the baby hasn't made the choice themself to become a believer in Christ Jesus - therefore they have no right to be baptised, as someones has to BELIEVE and then be baptised.

Wild_Fan4Christ · Mar 10, 2005

S Walch said:
People here aren't rejecting baptism as a whole.

They are rejecting that children should be baptised when the Child himself hasn't chosen to be baptised.

When one is baptised as a adult - you have chosen to get baptised.

That choice isn't made for you. You make it youself.

Adult baptism and baby baptism are different in every aspect.

True, I should have rephrased that those who reject infant baptism.

But those who reject that seem to be the people (most, not all) who agree that Baptism is only "symbolic," and not required to save. They also seem to be the few that get baptised more than once.

Where is the sacred oath in all that???

Wild_Fan4Christ · Mar 10, 2005

S Walch

I have to ask you about the verse you have in your signature. Being that it is representative of the Sacrament of "Anointing of The Sick." Do you believe in this sacrament? Just curious...

Mark 2: 17
17 When Jesus heard this, he told them, "Healthy people don't need a doctor--sick people do. I have come to call sinners, not those who think they are already good enough."

S Walch · Mar 10, 2005

Aren't we told to not take oaths?

Matthew 5:33-37

33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’
34 But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne;
35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King.
36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

But you and I still disagree.

I don't believe baptism saves - but I do believe one should at least consider being publicly baptised in a church to show that they have made a choice to follow God (ie Become a Christian)

I was baptised as a baby.

Whilst I see why my mother had me baptised (C of E Church - what you usually did) - I now know that I myself have chosen to be publically baptised again to show that I myself have chosen to follow Christ - I wasn't forced into it this time - this was my own personal choice.

S Walch

I have to ask you about the verse you have in your signature. Being that it is representative of the Sacrament of "Anointing of The Sick." Do you believe in this sacrament? Just curious...

Mark 2: 17
17 When Jesus heard this, he told them, "Healthy people don't need a doctor--sick people do. I have come to call sinners, not those who think they are already good enough."

you''ll have to explain what the "annointing of the sick" sacrement is - as I have never heard of it before

Wild_Fan4Christ · Mar 10, 2005

SLStrohkirch said:
Actually Lutherans themselves have only 2 of them: Baptism and Holy Communion (Eucharist). Confession would be a sacrament but there is no physical host involved.

Really, when I went to my ex-girlfriends Lutheran church they took in the host Or, are you saying Lutherans don't believe in the "real presence?"

Marriage, Last Rites, Holy Unction, Confession

These four while beneficial to some are not beneficial to all. Baptism is beneficial to all because all who witness a baptism are taken back to their own Baptism and reminded of what took place. Holy Communion because many are taking the Body and Blood of our Lord and Saviour, but Marriage, while a sacred oath is only for the 2 people involved and not for the witnesses. Last Rites involve only the person dying. Holy Unction involves only the persons anointing the sick and the sick themselves, but not anyone outside of the group. Confession the way the Roman Catholics practice it only benefits the person confessing and receiving absolution.

True, marriage is not for everyone. That is why there is a sacrament that Catholics follow to make sure it is not to make a mockery of. I agree, marriage is for the 2 people. But what about the families there as those 2 are getting married into the "family" of the Church? Not sure if your church teaches the family concept.

And Last Rites, or "Anointing of The Sick" can also be for those who are terminally ill (i.e. cancer, etc...) I don't mean the common cold, but who are really sick.

And Confession benefits ALL of society, not just the person receiving absolution. Because to confess of ones sins you are indeed helping society to better itself as you may have wronged someone else and pray for their return.

Confirmation, as far as the Lutheran Church is concerned is a ritual bringing the catechumen to the status of adult in the church and giving them the right to participate in the Sacrament of the Altar.

It is the same way in the Catholic Church to bring the catechumen, young, and old if new to the church.

The rest of this I agree with.

Awesome, glad someone does here

Wild_Fan4Christ · Mar 10, 2005

S Walch said:
Aren't we told to not take oaths?

Matthew 5:33-37

33 Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.
34 But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne;
35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King.
36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37 Simply let your Yes be Yes, and your No, No; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

Yes, not to take false oaths. These aren't false oaths as God gave them to all of us in the form of the Sacraments. Since they were given to us by God, we are to follow and abide in HIS oaths.

But you and I still disagree.

I don't believe baptism saves - but I do believe one should at least consider being publicly baptised in a church to show that they have made a choice to follow God (ie Become a Christian)

I was baptised as a baby.

Whilst I see why my mother had me baptised (C of E Church - what you usually did) - I now know that I myself have chosen to be publically baptised again to show that I myself have chosen to follow Christ - I wasn't forced into it this time - this was my own personal choice.

I personnaly would not get Baptised again if I were Baptised as a baby (as I was). I had a Church try to persuade me into getting Baptised again, and if you had been reading my posts in this thread you will understand why I was turned away from that Church and many friends.

Just remember, it is more than a public profession meaning more than a "symbol." You are making a profession to God, and you already did that as a baby whether you like it or not.

And that is why I say it is a disgrace to God to do it more than once. I felt I was disavowing my Baptism taken as a baby, disavowing my family who gave me that gift of saving Grace, and especially disavowing God.

you''ll have to explain what the "annointing of the sick" sacrement is - as I have never heard of it before

Check you PM box in a little bit, I will send you what it is.

Philip · Mar 10, 2005

S Walch said:
you''ll have to explain what the "annointing of the sick" sacrement is - as I have never heard of it before

James 5:14-15
Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

InquisitorKind · Mar 10, 2005

Philip said:
I agree that it leaves the verse inconclusive. However, the fact that the vast majority of the time eis means 'to cause' suggests that the verse is inconclusive, but leaning towards baptismal regeneration.

Yes, that is fair.

~Matt

Philip · Mar 10, 2005

InquisitorKind said:
Yes, that is fair.

~Matt

Whoo Hoo. We have taken a baby step towards one another.

SacredKindred · Mar 10, 2005

I agree with hoser that baptism is not symbolic. It says numerous places in the bible that once you believe, you should be baptized. (and then join a church) I also don't believe that babies should be baptized because they are too young to believe... Believe, be baptized! Dedication of babies is good though. God Bless all of you today.

S Walch · Mar 10, 2005

Wild_Fan4Christ said:
I personnaly would not get Baptised again if I were Baptised as a baby (as I was). I had a Church try to persuade me into getting Baptised again, and if you had been reading my posts in this thread you will understand why I was turned away from that Church and many friends.

I have read that post and I can agree with you on that.

They should not in anyway have been trying to force you to get re-baptised.

I can therefore understand why you left certain church.

Forcing people to do things is not the christian way.

Just remember, it is more than a public profession meaning more than a "symbol." You are making a profession to God, and you already did that as a baby whether you like it or not.

Whilst true in that it's also a profession to God as well, I still don't beleive I did the same thing as when i was a baby.

to me it seems completely different.

When I was a baby - I didn't "believe" in Jesus Christ in the same way as I do now - infact, I didn't believe in Jesus Christ as I had no clue who Jesus Christ was!

And that is why I say it is a disgrace to God to do it more than once. I felt I was disavowing my Baptism taken as a baby, disavowing my family who gave me that gift of saving Grace, and especially disavowing God.[/quote[]

See above

Check you PM box in a little bit, I will send you what it is.

Click to expand...

The annointing of the sick is something new to me - but yes, I can agree with the apostle james on the annoting with Oil.

But also - do believe one just needs Jesus to heal him - one can see that with the many miracles of healing that Jesus did.

Qoheleth · Mar 10, 2005

Wild_Fan said:
There are seven Sacraments in the Catholic Church. Luther held on to three of those: the Eucharist, Baptism, and Confession.

Ok, you are probably asking me, what happened to Marriage in all of this? I don't know, why don't you go back and ask Luther.

Not entirely true. The Confessions absolutley list 3, and make way for 7 and give the possibilty for more, by definition.

SLS said:
Actually Lutherans themselves have only 2 of them: Baptism and Holy Communion (Eucharist). Confession would be a sacrament but there is no physical host involved.

Im sorry SLS, our Confession states:

Article XIII. (VII): Of the Number and Use of the Sacraments.

4] Therefore Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and Absolution, which is the Sacrament of Repentance, are truly Sacraments. For these rites have God's command and the promise of grace, which is peculiar to the New Testament

In fact I encourage the reading of this article in its entirety and see that by definition, there are 7 sacraments, and possibly more--again by definition.

Q

Baptism is NOT symbolic

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity

Byzantine Catholic

Facilitator

-

Well-Known Member

Lifetime friend of Dr. Luther

-

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity

-

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

-

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity

Well-Known Member

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity

Member

-

Byzantine Catholic

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency