A question about Baptism

[PatrolMan]

On 10/13/2016 at 5:39 AM, Louvain said:

I was Baptised as a baby but growing up and things going on in my life i became lost to God. Christ showed me my way home to him and now i feel like i want to be baptised in his love again. What do you think of this idea?

It's okay to be baptized again if you were baptized when a child without knowing why this was being done. As with an adult it's a different story. Baptism should be rightly laid, remembered daily and never repeated. Hope this helps. Baptism is the believers outward proclamation of His or Hers internal spiritual regeneration. Have a nice day.

[Hoddie]

19 hours ago, Ezra said:

Well the "authority" that you claim for the RCC is extremely questionable

If you beleive this, then you are questioning Jesus' words. Christ himself is the source of the Church’s authority. The New Testament shows that Christ deliberately created his Church to be the vehicle of his continuing mission in the world. He promised to remain present in his Church for all time, and he lovingly guides it through the presence of the Holy Spirit.

Here are some of the more important Scriptural references that address Church authority:

And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age." (Mt 28:18-20)

Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent Me, even so I send you."---(Jn 20:21)

In this passage, Jesus commissions the Apostles with continuing his own mission. Again, this mission has its source in the divine authority of the Father.

He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me."--(Mt 10:40) And:"He who hears you hears Me, and he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me." (Lk 10:16)

Here, Christ explicitly identifies himself with the Apostles: this identification is so complete that accepting or rejecting the Apostles is the same as accepting or rejecting Christ. What’s more, both passages compare the union between Christ and his Apostles to that of the Son and the Father within the Holy Trinity. Not to mention the Acts of the Apostles which provides abundant evidence of how Church authority was practiced during the Apostolic age.

and today the Pope's authority is a joke.

I don't think two thousand years of historicaly traced papal succession from St.Peter to our currant Pope Francis is a joke.

So what authority are you looking for?

I'm not, thats something you should be asking yourself with all the thousands of differnt Protestant/non-Denominal sects, with as many interpretations of Scripture. With all these interprtations of Scripture, all claiming they are inspired by the Holy Spirit, and without an sort of authority, can you tell me which one has the truth and which do not?   If you cannot, would yu agree that the only conclusion can be..... no authority= disunity?

Catholicism... built on solid rock. Protestantism... built on shifting sands.

Scripture itself is the final authority.

Then you should have no problem showing me the book, chapter and verse from the bible that claims this. If not, would you be willing to admit this statement is in error?

　

Peace

[Ezra]

2 hours ago, Hoddie said:

The New Testament shows that Christ deliberately created his Church to be the vehicle of his continuing mission in the world.

Right.  And that Church is NOT the RCC. That Church is the Body of Christ (all redeemed Jews and Gentiles).

On the other hand the RCC departed from Bible truth long ago. And today Liberation Theology and anarchy is being promoted by the leader of that church.

[Hoddie]

2 hours ago, Ezra said:

Right.  And that Church is NOT the RCC.

Sorry, but I disagree, and history does too, heres why. Among all the Christian churches, only the Catholic Church has existed since the time of Jesus. Every other Christian church is an offshoot of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox churches broke away from unity with the pope in 1054. The Protestant churches were established during the Reformation, which began in 1517. (Most of today's Protestant churches are actually offshoots of the original Protestant offshoots.) Only the Catholic Church existed in the tenth century, in the fifth century, and in the first century, faithfully teaching the doctrines given by Christ to the apostles, omitting nothing. The line of popes can be traced back, in unbroken succession, to Peter himself. This is unequaled by any other Christian church or institution in history.

Even the oldest government is new compared to the papacy, and the churches to which door-to-door missionaries belong are young compared to the Catholic Church. Many of these churches began as recently as the nineteenth or twentieth centuries. None of them can claim to be the Church Jesus established. The Catholic Church has existed for 2,000 years, despite constant opposition from the world. This is testimony to the Church's divine origin. It must be more than a merely human organization, especially considering that its human members—even some of its leaders—have been unwise, corrupt, or prone to heresy. Any merely human organization with such members would have collapsed early on. The fact that the Catholic Church is today the most vigorous church in the world (and the largest, with 1.2 billion members) is testimony not to the cleverness of the Church's

That Church is the Body of Christ (all redeemed Jews and Gentiles).

Are you talking about some sort of "invisible" church? Jesus said his Church would be "the light of the world." He noted that "a city set on a mountain cannot be hidden" (Matt. 5:14). This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches. If you wish to locate the Church founded by Jesus, you need to locate the one that has the four chief marks or qualities of His Church. The Church you seek must be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. Does your church meet these qualities? The Catholic Church does.

On the other hand the RCC departed from Bible truth long ago.

Quite a statement with nothing to back it up, wouldn't ya say? And, if you beleive this to be true, how about the Maronite Catholics, Ukrainian Catholics, and Chaldean Catholics?

And today Liberation Theology and anarchy is being promoted by the leader of that church.

You cant be meaning the Catholic Church. Jesus established only one Church, not a collection of competing churches (Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, non-denominational and so on). The Bible says the Church is the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:23-32). Jesus can have but one spouse, and his spouse is the Catholic Church. His Church also teaches just one set of doctrines, and those doctrines must be identical to the doctrines taught by the apostles. This is unity of belief unlike the many "Bible Christian" churches, with their "Bible alone" theory that simply does not work. Historical experience disproves it. Each year we see further splintering among "Bible believing" religions. Today there are thousands of competing denominations, each insisting its interpretation of the Bible is the correct one. Like the question I asked you in my last post which you so conveintly ignored... without any sort of authority, how do you know which one is correct and which is not? Please don't ignore this again... its not nice.

Anyhoo, the resulting divisions have caused untold confusion among millions of sincere but misled Christians. Just open up the Yellow Pages of your telephone book and see how many different denominations are listed, each claiming to go by the "Bible alone," but no two of them agree on exactly what the Bible means. One thing we know for sure: The Holy Spirit cannot be the author of this confusion. God cannot lead people to contradictory beliefs.

 

And Erza did you ever find that book chapter and verse in the bible that backs up your claim that "Scripture itself is the final authorty?"

Peace