Well, since Catholics practice water baptism, I guess Spirit baptism is out for them. After all, the Spirit baptism would be a violation of Eph 4, right?
no, Catholics actually believe the Bible, as opposed to the sola scriptura crowd that claims to follow it, but instead deny its clear teaching
Acts 2:38 “and Peter said to them, repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit”
there you have in one verse - water baptism for the forgiveness of sins and gift of the Holy Spirit.
can it be any clearer, it certainly was for 1,500 years.
Actually, I’ve never observed nor heard of RC’s
practicing
BAPTISM
at all.
Certainly NOT in the original meaning of the term.
Not really following the thread, but
“Of the doctrine of baptisms...” (Hebrews 6:2) There was John’s valid baptism andalso that of the Spirit, which Peter himself differentiated from that of water, as Cornelius and household received that baptism before they were baptized in water, (Acts 11:16) which type he also affirmed, and one is baptized into the body of Christ when he/she believes. (1Cor. 12:13) There is also baptism as a noun. (Lk. 12:50)
Thus Eph. 4:5 cannot be denying what Peter and others affirmed, that there was more than one baptism. There is one common experience of of being baptized into the body, but i think he is referring to the common formal act of identification with the Father, Son and Spirit in water baptism. The requirements for which are repentance and whole-hearted faith. (Acts 2:38; 8:36-38)