To: Havoc; Invincibly Ignorant
The Donatist practice of rebaptizing was particularly abhorrent to the orthodox.That's the line I found most interesting.
Seems like every time that came up in the first few centuries... all of the Christians knocked it down.
47,720 posted on
04/21/2003 10:48:37 AM PDT by
IMRight
(This space available - Refer all requests to 1-888-TAG-LINE - Managed by Malakhi advertising Inc.)
To: IMRight
Rebaptizing is required if the first was invalid. It's a matter of if you lay that ball against the backboard once and it don't go in, you haven't scored until it does. Likewise if the message you recieved was in error, then your salvation may or may not be valid. And it was particularly abhorent that he should tell them they were in gross sin for offering to Roman Gods. Who cares? The word of God is grossly offensive to people who are sure they know better than God. I don't find rebaptising particularly interesting - it's actually quite valid. Especially in those cases where people think they are saved by being dunked in water. That is neither salvation nor Christ's baptism. As such, it isn't so much a matter of
Rebaptism as being saved and properly baptised in Christ's baptism. Of course, I'm sure that's beyond your comprehension and probably lost on you; but, then, we have your other comments to judge the thought process from whence it comes.
47,769 posted on
04/21/2003 12:01:56 PM PDT by
Havoc
(If you can't be frank all the time are you lying the rest of the time?)
To: IMRight; Havoc; Invincibly Ignorant
The Donatist practice of rebaptizing was particularly abhorrent to the orthodox.That's the line I found most interesting.
Seems like every time that came up in the first few centuries... all of the Christians knocked it down.
Interesting, also, because the Essenes, and the groups which followed them, practiced daily "rebaptizing". This continues even today in the Mandaean/Sabeaen sects.
47,770 posted on
04/21/2003 12:03:07 PM PDT by
malakhi
(fundamentalist unitarian)
To: IMRight; Havoc; Invincibly Ignorant
That's the line I found most interesting.
This is what I found most interesting (aside from the fact there was really
no "orthodox" church at the time. "orthodox" is a matter of definition.):
By 350 they outnumbered the orthodox Christians in Africa, and each city had its opposing orthodox and Donatist bishops. It was the teaching of St. Augustine, as presented in his writings and at the debate between orthodox and Donatist bishops at Carthage (411), that turned the tide against Donatism. Strong state suppression and ascetic excesses among some of their own members further reduced their number. The remnants of the schismatic movement had vanished along with African Christianity before the advent of the Islamic invaders.
Vanished! Hmmmmmmmmm.
47,772 posted on
04/21/2003 12:04:34 PM PDT by
OLD REGGIE
((I am a cult of one! UNITARJEWMIAN))
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson