Difference between revisions of "Talk:Debate: Does Baptism regenerate or is it symbolic?"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Comment on the foregoing: clarif.)
(Comment on the foregoing)
Line 162: Line 162:
  
 
The Church has judged your false opinions as heresy. God has bound and loosed through His Church. You are in error. I showed you the clear Biblical passages that Baptism washes away sins, it is the Washing of Water and the Word, the Washing of Regeneration, that Baptism now saves etc. You have no answer and no reverence for holy Baptism [[User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier]]<sup>[[User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King]]</sup> 16:56, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
 
The Church has judged your false opinions as heresy. God has bound and loosed through His Church. You are in error. I showed you the clear Biblical passages that Baptism washes away sins, it is the Washing of Water and the Word, the Washing of Regeneration, that Baptism now saves etc. You have no answer and no reverence for holy Baptism [[User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier]]<sup>[[User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King]]</sup> 16:56, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
 +
:I assume you mean the Roman Church. The Roman Church has many, many confusing and contradictory stances on the Word of God (See Matthew 4:4 ''It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.'') The Roman Church needs to clarify its stance on the Word of God. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Live Free or Die]]</sup> 17:34, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
  
 
===Jeremiah 3:1===
 
===Jeremiah 3:1===

Revision as of 16:34, 23 May 2020

Zechariah 13 - What is meant by fountain?

The passages from Zechariah make no reference to water. In fact, it specifically refers to Christ and the blood of Christ. RobSLive Free or Die 13:11, 17 May 2020 (EDT)

Hi Rob. A fountain seems to suggest water, doesn't it? If you read it in parallel with Acts 22, St. Paul relates "Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins" suggesting the fountain of Baptism washes away sins, by the invocation of the Name of the Lord. Some of the other Prophets have also written of clean water washing away sins, e.g. the Prophet Ezekiel, who seems to be speaking of the future time of the restoration of Israel, when Israel will enter the New Covenant, and Israel and the Church will become one: "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean" (Ez 36:25). NishantXavierFor Christ the King 11:28, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
No, it does not. It can be a fountain of blood. Or something else, such as the warning against adulatory and the strange woman throughout Proverbs Chapter 5 (beginning at verse 3) which culminates in verse 18:
Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth
The fountain in this context of the whole of Chapter 5 is the urinary tract. RobSLive Free or Die 12:07, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

And Acts 22:16: "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."?

We are not discussing baptism, we are discussing the meaning of "fountain" in Zechariah Chapter 13. You have extrapolated an idiomatic meaning which is not there.
Let thy fountain be blessed is advice to young men how to avoid prostate problems in later life through inappropriate sexual conduct. A scriptural "fountain" does not necessarily imply water. RobSLive Free or Die 12:15, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
Your assumption and extrapolation of the meaning of "fountain" in Zechariah 13 has two devastating impacts:
(1) it twists and denies the redemptive value of the fountain of blood flowing from the House of David, and
(2) it exposes young men to sexually transmitted diseases and prostate problems by twisting the meaning of "fountain" in Proverbs chapter 5. RobSLive Free or Die 12:31, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

Hardly. God said He would open a fountain for sins to be cleansed. The Church Fathers like St. Gregory understand that of Baptism. The Church has always professed Baptism is for the remission of sins as in the Nicene Creed. This Tradition goes back centuries and millenia. In the article, I laid out 8 independent proofs. The first one was Zech 13:1. If you don't find that convincing, you can examine the other 7. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:43, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

  • God said He would open a fountain for sins to be cleansed.
Yes. A fountain of blood. RobSLive Free or Die 12:47, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

It's your assumption that it is blood. Read it in parallel with Ez 36:25 and you will see it is clean water. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:50, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

Void; that section you cite is specifically addressed to Israel, not the Christian church. Another extrapolation. RobSLive Free or Die 12:58, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

Before you extrapolate the meaning of the term "fountain" in Zechariah 13, you must explain what the terms "water", "fountain", and "stranger" mean in this passage:

15Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well.
16Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets.
17Let them be only thine own, and not strangers' with thee.
18Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.
19Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.
20And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?

RobSLive Free or Die 13:03, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

That passage is speaking about sexual immorality, and not about Baptism, and therefore is irrelevant to the topic. But I will answer, as the passage itself refutes your interpretation. Your argument is that fountain has no connection to water. But here fountain is correlated with water, and it is said drink waters out of thy one cistern, and running waters out of thine own well. It doesn't support your argument at all. I know what is meant in the passage; it is a caution against adultery. As one drinks even water from ones own well and not one's neighbor's, so much more one should not go to a neighbor's wife to commit adultery with her, but should enjoy married life with one's own wife. That aside, fountain and water being correlated even in this passage doesn't support your view. And you haven't answered the numerous New Testament passages. Ezekiel 36 is about the New Covenant, not the Old; when the Lord Jesus speaks to Nicodemus about rebirth of water and of spirit, He expects Nico to know those things; ergo, it was prophesied. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 23:18, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

So, in this passage a "fountain" is a penis. Water does not flow from a penis. RobSLive Free or Die 23:35, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
Drink waters out of thine own cistern, is monogamy, having sex with your own wife. Even "water" in this passage, is not H20. RobSLive Free or Die 23:39, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
Drink waters is quenching a sexual thirst. I am not even going to go there saying that drinking water is necessary for survival, which others may use as a rebuttal of Roman Catholic doctrine (the scripture allows for the vow of a Nazarene). My point is, you have no evidence whatsoever that the passage in Zechariah relates to H20. So there is no point moving forward to the New Covenant until this is resolved. RobSLive Free or Die 23:51, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
Now, while verse 17 is clear condemnation of wife swapping or wife-sharing, verse 16 may need some explanation. For this of course we look to the scripture. Marriage is honorable, and the bed undefiled Hebrews 13:14. There is nothing to be ashamed of being in a monogamous relationship, Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets, which is particularly an important lesson for society today.
Now, the question of, Who is the strange woman? Clue: it has not only a fleshly application as a warning against adulatory, but a very important spiritual application as well.
why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman. Homework: Read Jeremiah chapters 3-4. RobSLive Free or Die 00:10, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

The middle section about Jerusalem talks about God pouring out a spirit of kindness and prayer that will come about when all Israel repents of having afflicted the injured. Perhaps it means, when it decisively occurs, a fountain of that "pouring" will be opened in Jerusalem for sin and impurity from which it will flow bountifully for all Israel. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 00:44, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

  • In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David
You're right. This passage addresses specifically Israel and does not address the gentiles. It speaks of the day Israel accepts the blood of Christ for redemption of sin. RobSLive Free or Die 01:02, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

So, a strange woman can also be a strange doctrine, which can be a misinterpretation or misapplication of scripture. The image of spiritual adulatory and fornication exists throughout scripture, often expressed as go whoring after other gods or play the harlot. It is unfaithfulness (See Isaiah 54:5, Thy maker is thine husband). Here why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman can also be read why wilt thou be ravished (or embrace) a strange doctrine?, such as salvation by water and not blood, rejection of the sacrificial death of Christ, or infant baptism. RobSLive Free or Die 09:45, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

If you are wanting to extend the examples to infant baptism, you might do well to address the dedication of children to religious orders, which I'm sure pre-dates even Abraham. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 14:07, 20 May 2020 (EDT)
That enlarges the subject immensely. RobSLive Free or Die 09:26, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
Do you think the two "pourings" represent the two baptisms in the New Testament? VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 17:06, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Who is the bride of Christ?

So I am going to dwell on this misinterpretation and misapplication of the term "fountain" from which you extrapolate the idea it refers to water baptism and have built an entire false doctrine that spreads into the New Covenant.

To do this, we are going to examine Law vs Grace in Jeremiah chapter 3. Here we discover the shocking revelation that God is divorced.

They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the Lord.

The first part here is based on the Law of Moses, Dueteronomy 24: 2-4:

if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again...

But God says,

yet return again to me, saith the Lord,

i.e. the New Testament gospel of forgiveness and salvation. God is willing to break his own law to take back his spiritually adulterous wife, Israel. So I am going to ask the question again:

why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman (or doctrine), since the Gospel of Salvation has existed since the foundations of the earth was laid? RobSLive Free or Die 10:20, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

You are becoming confused. Here are the facts (1) Zechariah says there will be a fountain for washing the sinner. (2) St. Paul in the new Testament says he was told to wash away his sins in Baptism. (3) Therefore, Baptism is the foretold fountain for washing away sins. The New Testament illuminates the Old Testament, but you don't want to go to it. Ezekiel foretold God would sprinkle clean water on them and make them clean. Our Lord Jesus expected Nicodemus, a Teacher of Israel, to know the things He said about being born of Water and of the Spirit. You have not explained the Washing of Regeneration in Tit 3:5, the Washing of Water and the Word in Eph 5:26, and St. Peter's clear words that "Baptism now saves us". NishantXavierFor Christ the King 11:18, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

  • In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David
To the House of David. It does not say to gentile sinners. It says nothing of water. Jeramiah 3:1 says
  • yet return again to me, saith the Lord,
it says nothing of in that day. It says now, Today is the day of salvation. You have provided nothing to support a house of cards built on misunderstanding and misapplication of scripture. RobSLive Free or Die 11:39, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
In the Old Testament, salvation is not a future event. It has always existed. Rebellion against God prevented many people from finding it.
Before proceeding, answer this question: Were any people saved before Jesus was born? RobSLive Free or Die 11:42, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

The Church is the New Israel. Even the prophesy of Jeremiah of the New Covenant speaks of the House of Israel, yet St. Paul applies it to the Church.

If there is to be a dialogue, it has to be both ways. Here are my questions to you (1) How can St. Paul say "rise and be baptized and wash away your sins" if sins are not washed away in baptism? (2) How can St. Peter say "baptism now saves you" if baptism does not regenerate? (3) How can St. Paul say He saved us by the washing of regeneration, if baptism is not a washing of regeneration? If you answer those questions - whatever be the answer - then we can move forward in a two-way discussion.

As for whether people were saved in the Old Testament, they went to a place called the Bosom of Abraham or Limbo of the Patriarchs. After Christ's death, He came and took them to Heaven, to see God Face to Face. Thus in Luk 16, it is said the Angels carried the soul of Lazarus there NishantXavierFor Christ the King 11:54, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

I'll answer the same way I began my dialogue with Dataclafier, Romans 10:9-10. Paul said,
  • 9If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is LORD," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.
Nowhere does Paul (a) mention water, fountain, or baptism; (b) an infant cannot profess faith in God.
You are approaching the absurd position espoused by Dataclarifier that Christ died to save helpless babies and infants with no faith, but people who profess faith are not saved. RobSLive Free or Die 12:02, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
And all this is moot unless you can tell me what salvation is. I hope you can do a better job than Dataclarifier, cause he certainly doesn't know. RobSLive Free or Die 12:06, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

That's not an answer. Christ did not come to condemn babies but to save them. He came for all. Babies too have the gift of the Holy Spirit promised to them and receive Him in Baptism. They are born of the flesh and are born again to eternal life in Baptism. Nobody whomsoever is saying that those with faith will not be saved. When you come of age, you must profess the Faith. Ever heard of the Nicene Creed? We know Jesus Christ is God, True Son of God and Savior of the world. We know that by His Blood we are washed from every sin. We know He gave His Body and His Blood in Holy Communion. But Baptism is not a symbol, as some Protestants erroneously thought, totally departing from 1500 years of unbroken Christian Tradition. You said the Orthodox Church is orthodox, but the Orthodox Church also holds with us that Baptism regenerates the soul. Catholic-Orthodox Re-union is almost complete. Recently, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Patriarch Bartholomew, said Catholics and Orthodox believe the same and re-union is inevitable.

What is salvation? Salvation means to receive the remission of our sins and the free gift of the Holy Spirit, God's Gift of Grace in Christ.NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:12, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Free gift, huh? Why does it have be paid for by baptism? RobSLive Free or Die 12:20, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Baptism is God's Free Gift. Did you read what St. Gregory said about it? "Baptism is God's most beautiful and magnificent gift....We call it gift, grace, anointing, enlightenment, garment of immortality, bath of rebirth, seal, and most precious gift. It is called gift because it is conferred on those who bring nothing of their own; grace since it is given even to the guilty; Baptism because sin is buried in the water; anointing for it is priestly and royal as are those who are anointed; enlightenment because it radiates light; clothing since it veils our shame; bath because it washes; and seal as it is our guard and the sign of God's Lordship.10"

You can't save yourself just like you can't baptize yourself. But you can receive the free gift of Baptism as a Grace of God in Jesus Christ Our Lord. As explained, if you have already been baptized, the Sacramental Gift you need next is Holy Communion. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:23, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Gregory ain't the word of God. RobSLive Free or Die 12:31, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Comment on the foregoing

A personal comment (not intended to be solicitation to leave the Roman Catholic Church, or for that matter any Protestant denomination).

In five decades of discussing and debating infant baptism and the alleged "regenerative power" of water, I have never met on single solitary advocate of Roman Catholic doctrine with any knowledge or understanding of scripture (note: I use the biblical terms "knowledge and understanding" rather than the colloquial "knowledge and comprehension" per the exhortation in Proverbs 4:5-7 [1] and James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him and Jesus, ask and it shall be given. I have never meet a former Roman Catholic who followed this exhortation to read the Bible and ask for understanding from God, and did not come away saying that Roman Catholic doctrine conflicts with the Word of God.)

Back to our understanding of Biblical idioms. I have made the case, per context and wisdom I asked God for, that "fountain" in Proverbs chapter 5 refers to a penis, calling into question whether other scholars, ignorant of scripture, have mistakenly assumed "fountain" in Zechariah is a reference to water or water baptism. But Catholic scholars are not alone in making assumptions or teaching some strange interpretation of scriptural idioms. Hebrew, like modern English, has several words to refer to the male sex organ. For laughs, read some Protestant commentaries on the meaning of Canticle of Canticles 5:4,

  • My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him.

Many Protestant commentaries have, like their Catholic brethren, either foolishly or deliberately reinterpreted the meaning of this verse, including what a "bowel movement" is ("I saw his hand opening the door, and I got so excited I pooped my pants"). It's easy to see, once wisdom is granted from God, how and why these misunderstandings and mistranslations take place.

A bolt latch refers to the male sex organ that couples with "the door" or female sex organ, the entry point; "put in his hand by the hole of the door" means he did a Joe Biden on her, and no, she didn't have a bowel movement.

The main point I make here is Roman Catholic doctrine, based upon a misinterpretation of the so-called "Great Commission" proclaiming the bishop of Rome as the "Vicar of Christ" nullifies James 1:5, humbling yourself and asking God for wisdom. RobSLive Free or Die 20:37, 21 May 2020 (EDT)

The Great Commission is probably the single most important calling to the Church today, beside to be holy and faithful in all things. The Great Commission itself refutes the recent idea that Baptism is meaningless, for otherwise Christ would not have laid so much emphasis on Baptism along with Evangelism. Christ only refers to the Name of the Holy Trinity during His command for Baptism. Have you never seen the sick healed? If you believe the sick can be healed in accordance with Jam 5:15 "And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.", by faith and in the Name of Jesus, as the Apostles showed e.g. St. Peter (Acts 4:10), why will you doubt that the Name of the Holy Trinity, the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, will heal the spiritual sickness of sins? I think the case is already solidly established. If someone still disagrees, I can only say, pray, and continue to study the Word. God may surprise you one day. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 11:33, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
I've read the bible through cover to cover many times. Can't find any reference to "Great Commission". Show me chapter and verse where it is. RobSLive Free or Die 12:17, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Gospel of St. Matthew - 28:[18] "And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to Me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." NishantXavierFor Christ the King 13:01, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Mat 4:19 as well: "[19] And he saith to them: Come ye after Me, and I will make you to be fishers of men."NishantXavierFor Christ the King 13:03, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Mat 9:38: "[38] Pray ye therefore the Lord of the Harvest, that He send forth labourers into His harvest."NishantXavierFor Christ the King 13:04, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

So there is no "Great Commission" in the text. What we have here, again, is what Jesus spoke of Matthew 15:7-9,
  • Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Neither Isaiah, Matthew, or Jesus speak of a 'Great Commission'. It is a doctrine of men, rendering the Word of God of no effect. RobSLive Free or Die 13:28, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
Yeah but...do you know what arguing from silence means? Transformations having to do with Kingdom of Heaven may require new words like new wineskins for new wine.
But sometimes terminology is abused when it prejudges certain facts not in evidence, or characterizations for which no foundation is provided. In fact I wish that Conservapedia would do just that with liberal euphemisms.
Or if the term melts together the category of the idea with another category that is irrelevant or too big because of excess abstraction. There are many ways to mess up the definition of something.
But well-composed ones like Trinity and Original Sin bring biblical ideas together to help focus and guide our thinking and acting—in, of and through biblical testimony, of course. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 14:06, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
I understand what you're saying. My personal view is that turning a fairly simple concept into an official doctrine can obscure the meaning, making it esoteric and inaccessible to everyone but only to the enlightened few and intellectuals. God, of coarse, is opposed to this. Original Sin is not a mystery - it is pride. The trinity is a teaching device. I'm reminded of the verse in the Koran (Surah 6:101), according to one translation,
  • Limitless is He is His glory, and sublimely exalted above anything that men may devise by way of definition: the Originator of the heavens and the earth! How could it be that He should have a child...
Simple logic, and not divine inspiration, could tell you that if He is "limitless in His glory" and Originator of all things he would have the power to have a child. Logic again would tell you that, according to this doctrine, man is more powerful than God if only mere mortals can have children.
This type of highfalutin spiritual language, basically, is intended to be deceptive and lead a person away from God. If any of you lacks wisdom, ask God and he will give it to you. God doesn't say he'll take it under advisement. It's a promise. A guarantee. Just as forgiveness and salvation require asking God for those things he has already promised. RobSLive Free or Die 16:12, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
Sometimes if you don't understand something completely, you don't understand it at all. I'm not referring to you BTW. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 16:47, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
FYI: there is an important difference between "doctrine" and "articles of faith" that appear in a creed. Doctrine is optional for a layman to profess, but gives the reasons how the articles of faith came to be. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 17:13, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

What are you talking about, Rob? The Commission to go and teach all nations, to baptize them and evangelize them, is what is called the Great Commission. Where in the Bible did Jesus give anyone the authority to form many churches? Answer: nowhere. He founded one Church (Mat 16:18) and made St. Peter the Chief Bishop or Pope of this Church. All Christians should unite with the Pope, and carry out the mission to baptize and evangelize all NishantXavierFor Christ the King 16:14, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

The church does not give salvation. God does. Read James 1:5 again:
  • If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, and it shall be given him.
Lack wisdom = understanding the Bible. It does not say ask the church. RobSLive Free or Die 15:41, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

==Read Mat 18:16-18. What does the Lord say about one who refuses to hear the judgment of the Church? He says such a person should be admonished. God gave the Keys to St. Peter and the Apostles, the first Pope and Bishops of the Church, to bind and loose. What does that power of the Keys imply? Read Acts 15. When a doctrinal dispute broke out, the Church gathered in Council and authoritatively settled the dispute.

Mat 18:16 "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. 18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." NishantXavierFor Christ the King 16:28, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

The church ain't God. RobSLive Free or Die

God gave His Power to Bind and Loose to His Church. It's right there in your Gospel. King James version also. How will Protestants explain that?

Btw, we pray for Wisdom all the time. In the Church's Liturgies and our personal prayers as well. But whenever some doctrinal or disciplinary dispute breaks out, all Christians should gather together, pray for Wisdom together and try to sort it out in Council. There is a Third Nicene Council scheduled to be held in 2025. Perhaps all Christians can pray for Wisdom there and work it out? NishantXavierFor Christ the King 16:33, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Ok, thy faith has made thee whole (words of Jesus); by grace you have been saved through faith (Paul). Until you accept this God-given, doctrinal truth, you are not saved. All your baptizing and evangelizing amounts to nothing. RobSLive Free or Die 16:49, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

The Church has judged your false opinions as heresy. God has bound and loosed through His Church. You are in error. I showed you the clear Biblical passages that Baptism washes away sins, it is the Washing of Water and the Word, the Washing of Regeneration, that Baptism now saves etc. You have no answer and no reverence for holy Baptism NishantXavierFor Christ the King 16:56, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

I assume you mean the Roman Church. The Roman Church has many, many confusing and contradictory stances on the Word of God (See Matthew 4:4 It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.) The Roman Church needs to clarify its stance on the Word of God. RobSLive Free or Die 17:34, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Jeremiah 3:1

I think the most important thing we've learned from this discussion is that the Gospel of Grace is preached in Jeremiah chapter 3 verse 1.

  • They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that land be greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to me, saith the Lord.

God commanded to stone the adulterer, yet here he is defying his own Law and asking his adulterous wife to come home (For God so loved the world...). No, evangelism and the Gospel of Salvation did not begin with the Great Commission. RobSLive Free or Die 16:29, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Isaiah wrote at one point, Israel paid double for her sin, and I think he was refering to the Babylonian captivity that Jeremiah tried to stop. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 16:41, 23 May 2020 (EDT)
Yes, that's basically is the law, passages such as the thief shall repay seven times, and ye have robbed me in tithes and offerings, etc. RobSLive Free or Die 16:53, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

That passage is speaking about Israel's return to the Lord. Israel was unfaithful to the Covenant. But the Lord in His Mercy will graciously welcome her back. Evangelizing the great nation of Israel with the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ Our Lord is of the utmost importance for the Church.

Comment: yes and no. Today is the day of salvation. God didn't say, "Wait a few hundred years and Jesus will come and then everything will be restored". God, through Jeremiah, was preaching grace. And God was willing to toss his entire law into the trash which was written for sinners. Ye are not under law but under grace. RobSLive Free or Die 16:57, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Do you believe Christians should evangelize non-Christians or not, Rob? Our Lord evangelized. His Apostles evangelized. The Catholic Church has always evangelized. There are 1.3 billion Catholic Christians in the world, from Australia to Asia to Europe to Africa to Latin America to North America. On all continents everywhere. All Protestant denominations united (some 10,000 by some counts) are about 1.2 billion. Catholics and other Christians should unite and evangelize the remaining 5 billion people in the world who are in danger of perishing without the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ Our Lord NishantXavierFor Christ the King 16:44, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

I'm evangelizing the lost right now with the Word of God. RobSLive Free or Die 16:51, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Typical of anti-Catholic Protestants. Zero interest in reaching non-Christians or promoting the common cause of the Gospel and Christendom. Instead spend all your time attacking Catholics. Anti-Catholic Protestantism is the very worst thing that ever happened to Christianity. Catholic Christianity with great Saints like Saint Francis Xavier would have evangelized the world by now if not for you anti-Catholics attacking and dividing Christianity. You have no answer to those clear Biblical proofs I gave you that Jesus Christ solemnly commanded you in the Gospel to hear and obey His Church. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 16:54, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Laying aside your assumption, let me ask you this: What role does faith have in salvation? RobSLive Free or Die 16:58, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Do you believe in the Once Saved, Always Saved Heresy? I can give you at least Ten Biblical Verses against it. Probably good subject for a new essay. Faith is the beginning of salvation, not the end of salvation. Justification!=Salvation. Justification+Sanctification+Perseverance in Grace=Salvation. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 17:02, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Your question is based upon relativist thinking. What I believe does not matter. I do not determine what is truth for me or what is God's truth. RobSLive Free or Die 17:17, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Catechism of the Catholic Church on Baptism:

I. What is This Sacrament Called?

1214 This sacrament is called Baptism, after the central rite by which it is carried out: to baptize (Greek baptizein) means to "plunge" or "immerse"; the "plunge" into the water symbolizes the catechumen's burial into Christ's death, from which he rises up by resurrection with him, as "a new creature."6

1215 This sacrament is also called "the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit," for it signifies and actually brings about the birth of water and the Spirit without which no one "can enter the kingdom of God."7

1216 "This bath is called enlightenment, because those who receive this [catechetical] instruction are enlightened in their understanding . . . ."8 Having received in Baptism the Word, "the true light that enlightens every man," the person baptized has been "enlightened," he becomes a "son of light," indeed, he becomes "light" himself:9

Baptism is God's most beautiful and magnificent gift....We call it gift, grace, anointing, enlightenment, garment of immortality, bath of rebirth, seal, and most precious gift. It is called gift because it is conferred on those who bring nothing of their own; grace since it is given even to the guilty; Baptism because sin is buried in the water; anointing for it is priestly and royal as are those who are anointed; enlightenment because it radiates light; clothing since it veils our shame; bath because it washes; and seal as it is our guard and the sign of God's Lordship.10

6 ⇒ 2 Cor 5:17; ⇒ Gal 6:15; Cf. Rom 6:34; ⇒ Col 2:12.


7 ⇒ Titus 3:5; ⇒ Jn 3:5[ETML:C/].


8 St. Justin, Apol. 1, 61, 12: PG 6, 421.


9 ⇒ Jn 1:9; ⇒ 1 Thess 5:5; ⇒ Heb 10:32; ⇒ Eph 5:8.

10 St. Gregory of Nazianzus, Oratio 40, 3-4: PG 36, 361C. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:52, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

You're doing a Dataclarifier, refusing to answer specific questions and spamming the page with extraneous nonsense irrelevant to the question raised. RobSLive Free or Die 13:00, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

Not at all. The topic is Baptism, not sexual sin, nor any other such thing. A Catechism on Baptism is perfectly related to the topic. The Catholic Church is the world's largest Christian denomination (it is more than that imo, but it is at least that), larger than all of non-Catholic Christianity combined, and is one of the main Churches (along with Orthodox, and some historical Evangelicals) that teaches Baptismal Regeneration. Because of the many Scriptures and Church Fathers cited in its brief explanation, it is perfectly consonant with solid theological discussion on the subject. You could consider and perhaps research if there is any serious Protestant explanations of John 3:5, Titus 3:5 and other such passages out there. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 23:18, 18 May 2020 (EDT)

My point is, you didn't respond to valid criticism in the above thread, but rather posted a bunch of extraneous spam as a response. RobSLive Free or Die 23:43, 18 May 2020 (EDT)
Just to get an idea of the general idea of the RobSmith-Dataclarifier-(et. al). dispute, is it really just a debate over Catholic and Protestant interpretations of the Bible? Now I'm far from a Bible expert, but isn't the Roman Catholic Church the one original church based off of and founded off of Jesus Christ's teachings? After all, all other Christian denominations were founded by individuals who had different interpretations of the Bible. Also, irrelevant, but I have a humorous prediction that Dataclarifier's favorite meat is Spam. --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 00:08, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
What is commonly referred to as the 'Roman Catholic Church' didn't arise until the the 16th century. And no, the original churches were in Jerusalem, Antioch, the '7 churches in Asia' (modern Turkey); then the churches in the Hellespont. The Roman Church has bloated its history and claims since the 11th century. Orthodox Christianity is orthodox; the Roman Church is the whacked-out breakaway sect with unorthodox doctrines and wild claims about itself. RobSLive Free or Die 00:17, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Alright, fine. Catholic Church, as there is a difference specified here. --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 00:24, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Yes. 'Catholic' come from the Epistolan Katholika or Catholic Epistles. Sometimes referred to as the Catholic Epistles of Paul, but it really starts with the book of Acts. Now, for all this dispute between me and Dataclarifier, our discussion left off when I asked him point blank, "Does the Roman Catholic Church accept the Epistles of Paul as the Word of God? (diff available). A pretty simple question any one should be able to answer. He never answered it, but has been on a non-stop troll campaign against me including tens of thousands of bytes of cut n paste text and an infinite block. RobSLive Free or Die 01:36, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Oh, and no, the RobSmith-Dataclarifier-(et. al). dispute, is not really just a debate over Catholic and Protestant interpretations of the Bible. I am a small "c" catholic. RobSLive Free or Die 00:20, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
What do you mean by "small "c" catholic"? And what about Dataclarifier? --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 00:24, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
I was raised Catholic- devout Catholic at that. While I embrace many so-called "Protestant' doctrines and fellowship with many other small "c" catholics and Protestants of all stripes, I've never felt totally accepted in Protestant culture which often can be virulently anti-Catholic. I can't deny I'm catholic anymore than the most atheist Jew can deny being a Jew. Dataclarifier OTOH, seems adamantly at war with anything non-Roman Catholic, particularly Protestant moreso than Jews, Buddhists or Muslims. And he doesn't even realize some of his understanding of Roman Catholic Doctrine conflicts with what Roman Catholic doctrine is. He's a church historian, nothing more. And lacks a serious understanding of the Bible. RobSLive Free or Die 01:10, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
For example, while I find trivia like Bogomil: Bogomilism fascinating, it has absolutely nothing to do with my salvation, but he seems to think it does. RobSLive Free or Die 01:15, 19 May 2020 (EDT)
Ah, interesting. --LiberaltearsJust say no to quid pro joe! | Free Roger Stone! 01:24, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Protestantism's claims are not historical. All history bears witness that the Catholic Church is the original Church of Christ that goes back to the Lord Himself and to His First Apostles. Here is an eminent Protestant Historian, Philip Schaff, admit this simple historical fact: "The succession list of bishops in the apostolic see of Rome of the first two centuries as provided by Schaff (volume 2, page 166) is --

St. Peter (d. 64 or 67) St. Linus (67-76) St. Anacletus (76-88) St. Clement I (88-97) St. Evaristus (97-105) St. Alexander I (105-115) St. Sixtus I (115-125) St. Telesphorus (125-136) St. Hyginus (136-140) St. Pius I (140-155) St. Anicetus (155-166) St. Soter (166-175) St. Eleutherius (175-189) St. Victor I (189-199) "It must in justice be admitted, however, that the list of Roman bishops has by far the preminence in age, completeness, integrity of succession, consistency of doctrine and policy, above every similar catalogue, not excepting those of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople...." (Schaff, page 166)" http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/PeterRockKeysPrimacyRome.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] [[User talk:{{{1}}}|(talk)]]

What are Protestant claims?
Secondly, Cain too traced a lineage back to Adam; all of his progeny were wiped out in the flood (the seed of the wicked shall be rooted out). Why were his descendants destroyed and not Seth's? Easy answer, cause he offered a bloodless sacrifice (in this case the produce of the field, not water as you espouse) and not an acceptable blood sacrifice. RobSLive Free or Die 12:29, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

In the Scriptures, Jesus Christ our Lord and God declares St. Peter the Rock of His Church on Earth (Mat 16:18), gives him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to bind and loose on earth (Mat 16:19), and promises the gates of hell will not prevail against this true Church of which St. Peter is the Head Bishop. Do Protestants believe this promise? An excerpt from the above link, a Protestant Bible commentary: ""In Jewish interpretation, the key of David refers to the teachers of the Law (exiled in Babylon); according to Matthew 23:13, the 'keys of the Kingdom of heaven' are in the hands of the teachers of the Law. A contrast is here drawn between them and Peter. He is thus not the gatekeeper of heaven, but the steward of the Kingdom of heaven upon earth. His function is described in more detail as 'binding and loosing' ....the saying must from the very outset have referred to an authority like that of the teachers of the Law. In this context, 'binding" and 'loosing' refer to the magisterium to declare a commandment binding or not binding....For Matthew, however, there is only one correct interpretation of the Law, that of Jesus. This is accessible to the community through the tradition of Peter...Probably we are dealing here mostly with teaching authority, and always with the understanding that God must ratify what Petrine tradition declares permitted or forbidden in the community." (Schweizer, page 343)" http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/PeterRockKeysPrimacyRome.htm God gave teaching authority to the Pope and the Bishops. He gave them the Promise of the Holy Spirit to guide them in all Truth. In Acts 15, we see the Apostles held a Council when a question on circumcision arose NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:41, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

You're somewhat loosing me; in Hebrews, the question is discussed that Jesus was born of the tribe of Judah, not of the priestly tribe of Levi or 'teachers of the law'. Is this what you are referring to? RobSLive Free or Die 12:51, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Acts 22:16 is enough to end the debate: Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins

Here is the verse in the Protestant KJV, Catholics are not making this up; St. Paul really said it!

"And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

It is clear. The Name of the Lord (the Holy Trinity) causes our sins to be washed away. Our sins are washed in Baptism. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 11:37, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Job 1:1:
  • In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright
Show me where Job was baptized to be declared blameless. RobSLive Free or Die 12:15, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

It's not an answer, again. St. Paul says be baptized and wash away your sins. You simply don't believe him. But it doesn't matter since you are baptized. What you should investigate is Holy Communion. If they who call themselves Baptists lied to you saying Holy Baptism is only a symbol, very probably they also lied to you saying Holy Communion also is only a symbol. But it is not. Read John 6 and 1 Cor 10 and 11. What did the Lord say? "He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood abides in Me and I in him". Holy Communion is the True Body and the real Precious Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.

As for what you ask about Job, it is irrelevant, but he was one of the OT Patriarchs who went to Limbo. They all went to Heaven only after Christ baptized them in His blood. You can read this. It was written by the Pharisee Nicodemus, the same Pharisee to whom Jesus said "you must be born again of water and the Spirit" in St. John 3:5: "5 For we have only three days allowed us from the dead, who arose to celebrate the passover of our Lord with our parents, and to bear our testimony for Christ the Lord, and we have been baptized in the holy river of Jordan. And now they are not seen by any one." https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/lbob/lbob10.htm NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:22, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

  • Without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.
Ok, next you'll tell me water is symbolic of the blood (read the title of this page). RobSLive Free or Die 12:35, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

St. John says Jesus came in Water and in Blood not in Water only but in Water and in Blood. When you are washed in water, it avails for you as if you had been washed in the Water and Blood that flowed from the Lord's Sacred Heart. That grace from His Heart, His Water and His Blood, washes away sin.

How do you understand Holy Communion? Here it is in the Protestant KJV so you can be assured Catholics didn't make it up: "48 I am that bread of life. 49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever."

I'm leaving now. I'll check back later. In Our Lord Jesus, Nishant Xavier. God Bless. NishantXavierFor Christ the King 12:48, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

I'm not certain what we're even talking about. Have we resolved the issue of the use of the term "fountain" in Zecharaih yet? or what salvation is? I do not believe we can even discuss issues surrounding baptism until we understand what it means to be saved from the wrath of God. RobSLive Free or Die 13:04, 19 May 2020 (EDT)

Resource listing of Bible passages supporting Regenerative Baptism

See [[Essay: Water baptism cannot save, the Church cannot save, Born again by faith alone]]. This is a "Bible study" listing of all the Bible scriptures that are opposed by all who reject the doctrines of Regenerative Baptism, [[Infant baptism]], and the authority of the Catholic Church — a genuine Sola scriptura response from the whole context of the Bible: "the holy scriptures, which are able to make you wise unto salvation." Pax vobis --Dataclarifier (talk) 19:08, 20 May 2020 (EDT)

No it's not. We have extensively demonstrated:
  1. Dataclarifier's lack of knowledge and understanding of scripture;
  2. Dataclarifer is on record in more than one instance denying the authority of scripture.
I will add, Dataclarifier's creating an new subheading here and not adding anything further to the discussion, and his lack of response on other pages to these questions, is trolling. RobSLive Free or Die 18:12, 21 May 2020 (EDT)
He must have been told not to talk to you. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 18:05, 22 May 2020 (EDT)
The Word of God is quick and powerful. RobSLive Free or Die 15:45, 23 May 2020 (EDT)

Why we need a mediator between God and man

These are all in Jesus' own words.

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it; and he gave to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins.—Matthew 26:26-28

And they come, bringing unto him a man sick of the palsy, borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the crowd, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed whereon the sick of the palsy lay. And Jesus seeing their faith saith unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins are forgiven. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, why doth this man thus speak? he blasphemeth: who can forgive sins but one, [even] God? And straightway Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, saith unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins are forgiven; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath authority on earth to forgive sins (he saith to the sick of the palsy), I say unto thee, Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thy house.—Mark 2:3-11

And he entered and was passing through Jericho. And behold, a man called by name Zacchaeus; and he was a chief publican, and he was rich. And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not for the crowd, because he was little of stature. And he ran on before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that way. And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to-day I must abide at thy house. And he made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully. And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, He is gone in to lodge with a man that is a sinner. And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord, Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have wrongfully exacted aught of any man, I restore fourfold. And Jesus said unto him, To-day is salvation come to this house, forasmuch as he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost. And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and [because] they supposed that the kingdom of God was immediately to appear.—Luke 19:1-10

And he said unto them, These are my words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their mind, that they might understand the scriptures; and he said unto them, Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name unto all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.—Luke 24:44-47

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him.—John 3:16-17

I am the door; by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and go out, and shall find pasture.

The thief cometh not, but that he may steal, and kill, and destroy: I came that they may have life, and may have [it] abundantly.

I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep.

He that is a hireling, and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, beholdeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth, and the wolf snatcheth them, and scattereth [them]:

[he fleeth] because he is a hireling, and careth not for the sheep.

I am the good shepherd; and I know mine own, and mine own know me,

even as the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.

And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice: and they shall become one flock, one shepherd.

Therefore doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.

No one taketh it away from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment received I from my Father.—John 10:9-18

VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 16:55, 22 May 2020 (EDT)

Great points. Where was the sick of the palsy baptized to have his sins forgiven? As Dataclarifier would say, Sola fide. RobSLive Free or Die 15:48, 23 May 2020 (EDT)