Baby Baptism

sojourner · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
Why respond? We are all the same anyway.

Because Christ calls us to respond. "Come. Follow."

Elvendon · Jul 12, 2006

You can't "gain" grace. Everyone is blessed with grace, sinners all. Grace is (almost) a purely one-way gift. We just have to accept it. Being a Christian is being "conscious" of grace.

A relationship is two-way. God will provide some of that which is needed, and is permanently willing to engage with us, but he won't force himself upon us. We need to pray, to work, to talk and to act in such a way to cultivate that relationship.

The difference between me and Bin Laden is that I am awhere of the grace of God upon my soul - he is not. I seek to relate to God, he does not. Of course, he relates to what he considers as God, but I personally don't worship my own bigotry.

Being a Christian does not mean you are better or more blessed than anyone else. In merely means you have accepted a specific relationship with God. One can judge who is a Christian not on who goes "Lord, Lord", but who lives a righteous and compassionate life.

sojourner · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
According to your earlier statements we don't NEED to acknowledge this. THAT would be a work. Are you now contending that the acknowledgement is efficacious? Wait a minute... God loves us all just the same. Why do YOU get to be transformed? Why not Bin Laden? Don't you think God loves Bin Laden? WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND BIN LADEN???

Not efficacious for the presence and work of grace in us -- but that grace must be translated in the world. That's ministry. That's what Christ calls us to do -- to make a response. Those of us who respond to the call are followers. Doesn't make "us" better than "them." It just means that our energy and attention can now be focused on ministry rather than self-absorbtion.

We are all transfromed by grace. But not all of us acknowledge that transformation, so we don't act on it in ministry.

The difference between bin Laden and me is that I have answered the call of Christ. Bin Laden has not.

Scuba Pete · Jul 12, 2006

What??? You mean RESPOND and nullify all that grace? No way. You have already told me that I have the same Grace as Osama. If I do ANYTHING that might be construed as a work, I will lose it all! Then Osama will have more grace than me.

You see? There HAS to be a response: an act of obedience. Anything else is simply NUTS.

This boils down to a few points at which we are at loggerheads.
I believe in scriptural Baptism.
I believe in scriptural Grace.

You rely on the traditions of the Catholic church which seem to run contrary to scriptural teachings (at least to me).

sojourner · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
What??? You mean RESPOND and nullify all that grace? No way. You have already told me that I have the same Grace as Osama. If I do ANYTHING that might be construed as a work, I will lose it all! Then Osama will have more grace than me.

You see? There HAS to be a response: an act of obedience. Anything else is simply NUTS.

This boils down to a few points at which we are at loggerheads.
I believe in scriptural Baptism.
I believe in scriptural Grace.

You rely on the traditions of the Catholic church which seem to run contrary to scriptural teachings (at least to me).

You're confusing action in order to receive grace with action as a response to grace already received.
The act of Baptism does not confer grace. Baptism is our response to grace that has already been received.

:edit: Grace is not quantitative. One cannot "have more" grace than another. Grace is not something one "gets." Grace is a state of being, given to all of us in the Christ-event. When we acknowledge the life of grace, we can realize its benefits as we give that life to others in ministry.

Scuba Pete · Jul 12, 2006

Show one instance in the Bible where an infant is baptised (households don't count).

As for ALL of us having the same grace...

James 4:6 But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says:
"God opposes the proud
but gives grace to the humble." NIV

You disagree with the scriptures yet again.

Scuba Pete · Jul 12, 2006

sojourner said:
The act of Baptism does not confer grace. Baptism is our response to grace that has already been received.

Please show me this in the scriptures.

Elvendon · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
You rely on the traditions of the Catholic church which seem to run contrary to scriptural teachings (at least to me).

If you mean Roman Catholic, I'm afraid you are wrong. Though I believe in the sanctity of the Church and their rites, I completely disapprove of it's authoritarian organisation - the RC is responisble for the emasculation of my tradition, so I am not Roman Catholic.

If we rely so much on acts of obedience, what if the ritual isn't done properly? Do you go to hell? If God wants to save someone, then why should he be limited to what the church does?

sojourner · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
Show one instance in the Bible where an infant is baptised (households don't count).

As for ALL of us having the same grace...

James 4:6 But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says:
"God opposes the proud
but gives grace to the humble." NIV

You disagree with the scriptures yet again.

Of course households count!

Not all of us ground theology in the concept of sola scriptura. For me, theology is based upon scripture, tradition, and reason. Just because it's not "in the Bible" in a literalistic way does not invalidate it.

Nothing I've said stands in opposition to the James passage. Unless you engage in proof-texting.:redcard:

Scuba Pete · Jul 12, 2006

Elvendon said:
on acts of obedience, what if the ritual isn't done properly? Do you go to hell? If God wants to save someone, then why should he be limited to what the church does?

I don't know... it was JESUS who first told us to be baptized. Maybe you should take it up with him?

Scuba Pete · Jul 12, 2006

sojourner said:
Of course households count!

Not all of us ground theology in the concept of sola scriptura. For me, theology is based upon scripture, tradition, and reason. Just because it's not "in the Bible" in a literalistic way does not invalidate it.

But you elevate tradition higher than the scriptures. There is nothing wrong with ANY of those as long as you get their priority right.

Love First. (The Spirit)
Scripture Second.
Logic third.
Tradition is a distant last place.

sojourner said:
Nothing I've said stands in opposition to the James passage. Unless you engage in proof-texting.:redcard:

EVERYTHING you have contended flies in the face of Jame's passage UNLESS you egage in utter denial.

sojourner · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
I don't know... it was JESUS who first told us to be baptized. Maybe you should take it up with him?

Actually, it was John who first told us to be baptized. And it was John's baptism in which Jesus was baptized...Biblically speaking.

Elvendon · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
I don't know... it was JESUS who first told us to be baptized. Maybe you should take it up with him?

No, but what if you are not baptised properly? If memory served, Jesus immersed in the Jordan. Were you?

Following Sola scriptura as a source for guidance can only take you so far. It leaves you stuck in a rut, giving you no room for manuever in ethical, theological or spiritual issues. It was devotion to this that gave rise to atheism - it deprived Christianity of it's day-to-day, spiritual realism and moved it up into the lofty rafters of universities and seminaries.

Scuba Pete · Jul 12, 2006

Elvendon said:
Following Sola scriptura as a source for guidance can only take you so far. It leaves you stuck in a rut, giving you no room for manuever in ethical, theological or spiritual issues.

Jesus thought much the same:

Mark 7:5 So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?" 6 He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.'8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." NIV

Elvendon said:
It was devotion to this that gave rise to atheism - it deprived Christianity of it's day-to-day, spiritual realism and moved it up into the lofty rafters of universities and seminaries.

Really, and I suppose you have some evidence for this? I guess I will stop reading my Bible IMMEDIATELY. It's way too dangerous. I should just follow the rules of men instead. Good call.

Elvendon · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc said:
Jesus thought much the same:

Mark 7:5 So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?" 6 He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.'8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." NIV

This is a good quote against the use of tradition, but has nothing to do with the sola scriptura approach.

Really, and I suppose you have some evidence for this? I guess I will stop reading my Bible IMMEDIATELY. It's way too dangerous. I should just follow the rules of men instead. Good call.

Don't be facecious. I said sola scriptura was the cause of atheism, not reading the Bible. By refusing to elabourate upon and augment scripture using common sense and tradition, the puritans who agreed with your approach crafted a form of religion that lacked many of the aspects that endear a faith to normal people (such as a sense of heritage and relevance) thus laying the way for widespread atheism in europe by making it easy for normal people to abandon daily worship.

Read "The Twilight of Atheism" by Alister McGrath. It tells you all about it.

And in response to your James quote, may I present Titus:

11For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. Titus 2:11

All men. All men. Grace has appeared to all men. Not just the humble, not just the jews. But all.

Elvendon · Jul 12, 2006

NetDoc? If you are still reading, follow this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_grace#New_Testament_ideas_of_grace

scroll down to NT ideas of grace, and have a read. It outlines my views on the subject.

Scuba Pete · Jul 12, 2006

That whole article (I didn't read it all) is full of misconceptions about "grace".

Elvendon · Jul 13, 2006

NetDoc said:
That whole article (I didn't read it all) is full of misconceptions about "grace".

Care to name a-few?

For your perousal, here is the section I was speaking about:

New Testament ideas of grace

The New Testament word that is usually translated "grace" is in Greek charis (χαρις), which literally means "gift". The word was not often used by Jesus himself; in the canonical Gospels it is attributed to him only in the Gospel of Luke and the Gospel of John. However, the parables attributed to Jesus in the Gospels make clear that Jesus did in fact teach the concept of grace. More importantly, He told stories that underlined that grace was God's to give, God's sole prerogative, and that it was freely offered.
Parables such as the Workers in the Vineyard, Matthew 20:1-16, tell of an employer (who in the traditional Christian understanding, represents God) who hires some workers early in the day, some later, and some an hour before quitting time, then pays each of them the same amount. When the workers who worked all day balk, the employer's explanation is, Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? . . . So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many are called, but few are chosen. Matt. 20:15-16 (KJV).
Similarly, the well known parable of the Prodigal Son, Luke 15:11 is traditionally understood by most Christians as containing the teachings of Jesus on grace. A son demands the family fortune and wastes it, then returns home expecting little in the way of good treatment. The father welcomes him handsomely, over the objections of his other son who stayed at home and served dutifully.
Many throughout Christian history have perceived a common thread in these parables of Jesus: the grace of God is something that upsets settled human notions about merit, about what is deserved, and what is due as recompense.
[edit]

Tension between grace and works in the New Testament

The New Testament exhibits a tension between two aspects of grace: the idea that grace is from God and sufficient to cover any sin, and the idea that grace does not free Man from his responsibility to behave rightly.
Many parables of Jesus preach grace broad enough to forgive any sin, and to be available regardless of the seeming unworthiness of its recipient. Examples of this included the parable of the Prodigal son and lost sheep. However, Jesus also said:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." -- the introduction to the Antithesis of the Law in the Gospel of Matthew Later, St. Paul of Tarsus wrote that For by grace ye are saved through faith: and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 (KJV) For St Paul, salvation, like the wages of the labourers in the parable, is God's gift at God's sole prerogative. Were it achieved by works (erga; any human effort that intends earning; see Rom. 4:4), men could take pride in their efforts toward holiness, and God's gift of grace would be diminished in contrast to man's efforts. This stands in tension to his teaching in Romans 2:6:
"To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life. But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God." A more works-oriented perspective is presented by the James 2:1-26, concluding that faith without works is dead. By "works," James here appears to include both acts of charity, and righteousness according to the code of laws; the preceding text mentions charity to the poor as well as sins against the law of Moses. An inward change, the forsaking of old sinful ways, and being reborn in a spirit of generosity is to James the true test of conversion. Without these things, claiming to have "faith" is a sham. Grace must be something that steels the Christian to avoid sin and practice charity. Without these signs, it seems likely that grace was never there.
The First Epistle of John maintains this tension throughout. On the one hand, it repeatedly claims that those who "walk in the light" do not sin and do enjoy fellowship with God, while those who "walk in darkness" have no fellowship with God. However, it also describes receiving forgiveness of sins through confession and God's grace. Verse 3:4 (NIV) states: "Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness."
However, a true study of Biblical teaching will show that in reality, there was no tension. The contrast between "faith" and "works" is really a contrast between Grace and the Law for salvation.
Paul was dedicated to stamping out the efforts of the Judaizers, who taught that Gentile believers must follow the Law of Moses to achieve Salvation. It was in this context that Paul spread the truth about Salvation being achieved through grace, not works. However, Paul, as well as Peter, John and James, make it clear that believers are to continue doing good works, and following the teachings of Christ, for example the Sermon on the Mount, out of love and obedience to God, who has written the law on the hearts of believers. Whilst works and keeping the Law are no longer the basis for salvation, they are still essential for living a Christian life and obeying the commands of God. Thus, the teachings and writing of all the apostles are not in tension, but rather harmony, with each other.
[edit]

Elvendon · Jul 13, 2006

The rest....

Efforts to resolve the tension

People have attempted to describe and resolve the tension in a number of ways. One potential resolution revolves around Jesus's parable of the talents in Matthew 25. In this parable, the Master decides to leave town on a journey. He left five coins with one servant, two coins with another servant, and one coin with a third servant. While the master was gone, the servants given five coins and two coins invested their coins, and doubled the money. The servant given one coin, however, buried it in the ground, and made no money. When the Master returned, the servants who had invested gave their master the money they had earned. The Master said:
"Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.' However, when he came to the last servant, who had hidden the money, the Master became angry, shouting:
'You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sowed, and gather where I have not winnowed? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. So take the talent from him, and give it to him who has the ten talents. For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." According to proponents of this idea, this parable illustrates how grace and works can coexist. All the servants owed their money to their master, because the master had given them the money. Therefore, they could not take any pride in their money, just as Paul argued that we are saved by grace and not works, so that no man should boast. However, all the servants were still responsible to use their gifts and grace to the glory of God. Failure to do so is sin, just as to James, "Faith without works is dead."

sojourner · Jul 13, 2006

NetDoc said:
But you elevate tradition higher than the scriptures. There is nothing wrong with ANY of those as long as you get their priority right.

Love First. (The Spirit)
Scripture Second.
Logic third.
Tradition is a distant last place.

EVERYTHING you have contended flies in the face of Jame's passage UNLESS you egage in utter denial.

OK. If it's true that God gives grace to the humble...who's more humble than an innocent infant??? Can we not celebrate and acknowledge the presence of that grace with a ritual in which we recognize the presence of Christ?

I do? in what way has anything I've said been proven to be "unBiblical?" Obviously, proof-texting a literalistic interpretation of a few passages of scripture is not a compelling argument for me. Fact is, I agree with what the Wikipedia article said. I agree with the position of the Anglican Communion. I find their stance Biblically compelling, as well as good practical theology. It makes sense in light of acting inclusively toward our children, as Jesus did.

Baby Baptism

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Mystical Tea Dispenser

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Mystical Tea Dispenser

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Mystical Tea Dispenser

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Mystical Tea Dispenser

Mystical Tea Dispenser

Le plongeur avec attitude...

Mystical Tea Dispenser

Mystical Tea Dispenser

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006