Posted on 12/31/2008 4:38:01 AM PST by Huber
To receive the Holy Spirit is not the same as be cleansed from sin. Note however that baptism closely follows conversion in all these cases, and 1 Peter 3:21 is explicit about baptism having salvific nature.
The Protestants are confusing conversion — such as what happened to Cornelius — with being saved. The Holy Scripture and the Church never made this mistake. Baptism saves because it remits original sin and sins already committed. It does not guarantee against future sins and therefore does not guarantee that the baptized person is justified upon death.
What makes you think I disagree?
our actions do not save us it is the grace of God by the power of the Holy Spiritand the new birth
What makes you think I disagree?
I never said that baptism will save a person. I was trying in around about way to say that baptizing babies does not make one saved. Although I do believe that there is a special grace for children until the age of accountability. My point was that there must be repentance and babies don’t even know what that is. In my opinion baptism is a outward sign of a inward work of the H.S. Works do not save neither does baptism.
1 Pet 3:21
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,
(NKJ)
499 antitupon (an-teet’-oo-pon);
neuter of a compound of 473 and 5179; corresponding [”antitype”], i.e. a representative, counterpart:
KJV— (like) figure (whereunto).
****It does not guarantee against future sins and therefore does not guarantee that the baptized person is justified upon death.****
THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS was written to show us we were allowed tohave ONE SIN after baptism. And Hermas was believed to be scripture for quite a few years in the early years of the church.
That is why so many, like Constanitne, waited till near death to get baptized, so there would be less sins after baptism.
This “antetype” appears another time in the Scripture:
For Jesus is not entered into the holies made with hands, the patterns of the true [antitypa ton alethinon]: but into heaven itself, that he may appear now in the presence of God for us. (Hebrews 9:24)
Note again, assertion of sacramentality.
Yes. It is incorrect — no sin or no amount of sins are greater than Christ’s mercy — but it sure illustrates that the Early Church understood Baptism as salvific and the process of salvation lasting a lifetime.
***The Protestants are confusing conversion — such as what happened to Cornelius — with being saved. ****
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Act 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. ....
Lets all get together and rip up our scriptures. Remove all the letters of Paul. Then we must remove the gospel of Luke and ACTS, as he was paul’s companion.
Then we must get rid of Mark as he is not mentioned anywhere else except in Acts and cause division between Paul and Barnabas so his “gospel” is not to be trusted.
All we will have is Matthew, John, James 1&2 Peter,1,2&3 John, Jude and Revelation.
The demands for baptism in Mark and Acts will be gone. Grace will be gone. We will be left with a judaized church preaching circumcision, sacrifices, law keeping and will probably not be open to the gentiles at all.
Does Messianic Judaism bother you?
***Does Messianic Judaism bother you?***
Where would you offer your animal sacrifices as James told Paul to do. There isn’t a temple anymore.
he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved. (Mt. 10:22, many similar)Being saved is a process which culminates at particular jusdgement upon death. When understood as a process, it can be equated with conversion, also a continuing process. When understood as a final justification, it is not the same because people may lose faith (1 Timothy 1:19) as well as increase it.by works a man is justified; and not by faith only (James 2:24)
“How, then, should a Catholic answer the question, “Have you been born again?”
... exactly the way anyone should answer: Not your business.
Eh, no. It is the business of a Christian to evangelize. If the Holy Apostles kept their faith to themselves, we’d be doing human sacrifices at the Inca temple now.
” It is the business of a Christian to evangelize. If the Holy Apostles kept their faith to themselves, we’d be doing human sacrifices at the Inca temple now.”
Finding the original question irrelevant doesn’t mean a person is keeping his faith hidden from view.
Sanctify the Lord Christ in your hearts, being ready always to satisfy every one that asketh you a reason of that hope which is in you" (1 Peter 3:15).
“to dismiss the questioner who presumably has a sincere concern for your soul is churlish. The answer that the article recommends, — I was baptised, which event put me on the road toward salvation and gave me hope of eternal life, — is accurate and it gives the opportunity for the Catholic or Orthodox Christian to evangelize the questioner in the doctrines of our faith.”
First, I don’t assume that the person standing at my front door is as concerned about my well-being as he is in lording his view over mine and demonstrating that he can recite some scripture.
The same goes for many other people who ask about whether someone is a Christian, the implication being that if you have not been “born again,” you are not a member of the new club. Who knew that being a “Christian” was so exclusionary?
I have no problem w/ the explanation/response given in the post by the Catholic writer — if there’s an honest, sincere discussion of what “born again” might mean to different people. And it can mean many things. But in most cases, whether I consider myself born again or not is irrelevant to the person asking.
If a Catholic feels called upon to defend his position,I would simplify the answer by saying that each time he attends Mass and says “Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again,” a re-affirmation of faith has been made. Some might even call that being born again.
Has never been my experience. I've been on the receiving end of Protestant, Mormon, and Jehovah Witness missionary effort many times and I my impression was always that people were sincere.
“Has never been my experience. I’ve been on the receiving end of Protestant, Mormon, and Jehovah Witness missionary effort many times and I my impression was always that people were sincere.”
You are indeed fortunate, then. My own experience has been that even if you said you were “saved” (and I don’t even subscribe to that convenient notion), it doesn’t count unless you’re “saved” in that person’s particular way.
That’s when the scriptural citations are rolled out. Sincerity notwithstanding, I see it all too often as less interest in my salvation than in their pride and enthusiasm in demonstrating the ability to memorize selected portions of the Bible that serve their purposes at the moment.
I guess you need to meet one of my cousins and a former co-worker. lol.
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.