True believers vs partial believers. Can the "SAVED" be saved?


#21

Dear Michael,

I do not understand what you mean. Can you clarify the point your making. Thanks.

Zeland


#22

On the specific point you are referring to, that can be used either way.

YOU have also been teached (hope that is clear) things just like anyone else.

That should be clear I HOPE.


#23

No, it isn’t. Just because sleep is used as a euphemism for death in the Bible does not prove the soul sleep doctrine is correct. Plus, there are all kinds of scripture that indicate conscious existence after death.

Not sure what you mean. I was referring to the Unitarian Universalist religion, which basically invites people to believe whatever they want. They have congregations and services, but they don’t actually have any doctrinal beliefs. People just believe whatever feels right to them.

Seventh Day Adventists have the 28 Fundamental Beliefs that members are supposed to believe, and they take vows at baptism to believe certain things. So the Seventh Day Adventist Church is nothing like Unitarian Universalism.


#24

Dear Michael,

Christ’s promise to keep his church free from error is not an assumption, it is a scriptural fact. See Matthew 16:18-19; _“And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”.

and Matthew 28:19-20 "_Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. 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…

As far as early Christian belief you can start with the following.

"The Fathers Know Best - get it at Amazon.

image

zeland

PS, Are Catholic or Protestant?


#25

Some Catholic scholars say otherwise…

No doubt proving that bishops were the successors of the apostles by divine institution would be easier if the New Testament clearly stated that before they died the apostles had appointed a single bishop to lead each of the churches they had founded. Likewise, it would have been very helpful had Clement, in writing to the Corinthians, said that the apostles had put one bishop in charge of each church and had arranged for a regular succession in that office. We would also be grateful to Ignatius of Antioch if he had spoken of himself not only as bishop, but as a successor to the apostles, and had explained how he understood that succession. Unfortunately, the documents available to us do not provide such help.” (Sullivan, From Apostles to Bishops, pg 223)

I hope this helps…


#26

Just saying that any other denomination and even religion can use this argument to argue why you are saying whatever you are saying with regards to religion.


#27

I don’t have any time at the moment to get involved much with this debate, but I just wanted to point out that sprinkling is perfectly acceptable. See Ezekiel 36:25-26 I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleanliness, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.


#28

In his massive work on baptism in the early Christian church, Everett Ferguson wrote:

The comprehensive survey of the evidence compiled in this study gives a basis for a fresh look at this subject and seeks to give coherence to that evidence while addressing seeming anomalies. The Christian literary sources, backed by secular word usage and Jewish religious immersions, give an overwhelming support for full immersion as the normal action. Exceptions in cases of a lack of water and especially of sickbed baptism were made.

Submersion was undoubtedly the case for the fourth and fifth centuries in the Greek East and only slightly less certain for the Latin West. Was this a change from an earlier practice, a selection out of options previously available, or a continuation of the practice of the first three centuries? It is the contention of this study that the last interpretation best accords with the available facts. Unless one has preconceived ideas about how an immersion would be performed, the literary, art, and archaeological evidence supports this conclusion. (Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries, p 857)

The Epistle of Barnabas states:

Blessed are they that set their hope on the cross, and go down into the water,… because we go down into the water laden with sins and filth. and rise up from it bearing fruit in the heart resting our fear and hope on Jesus in the spirit. (The Apostolic Fathers, page 185)

In addition, around 250 AD, Cyprian was asked the question: Could those who were sick and infirm merit God’s grace and be “accounted legitimate Christians” if they had only been sprinkled and not immersed? (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 5:400)

It seems an odd question to ask were sprinkling already an accepted practice.

Will Durant observed: By the ninth century, the early Christian method of baptism by total immersion had been gradually replaced by aspersion - sprinkling - as less dangerous to health in the Northern climes… (Durant and Durant, The Age of Faith, pg 738)


#29

I already showed you 6 in comment #11.


#30

How early do you mean? Around 250 AD, Cyprian was asked the question: Could those who were sick and infirm merit God’s grace and be “accounted legitimate Christians” if they had only been sprinkled and not immersed? (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 5:400)

It seems an odd question to ask were sprinkling already an accepted practice.

Will Durant observed: By the ninth century, the early Christian method of baptism by total immersion had been gradually replaced by aspersion - sprinkling - as less dangerous to health in the Northern climes… (Durant and Durant, The Age of Faith, pg 738)

The Catholic Church produced the Bible? Which Catholics wrote Genesis, Jeremiah, Numbers, and Malachi?

Neither.


#31

I’m surprised you’re not happy with the Scriptural verse I mentioned, seeing that it’s from God. Anyway, here’s Tertullian for you: “There is absolutely nothing which makes men’s minds more obdurate than the simplicity of the divine works which are visible in the act, when compared with the grandeur which is promised thereto in the effect; so that from the very fact, that with so great simplicity, without pomp, without any considerable novelty of preparation, finally, without expense, a man is dipped in water, and amid the utterance of some few words, is sprinkled, and then rises again, not much (or not at all) the cleaner, the consequent attainment of eternity is esteemed the more incredible.”
Source: http://www.tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-49.htm in chapter 2, ‘The Very Simplicity of God’s Means of Working, a Stumbling-Block to the Carnal Mind.’

If you’re still not satisfied, here are some protestant Christians on the subject:
https://carm.org/does-word-baptism-mean-immersion-or-sprinkling

https://www.fivesolas.com/sprinkle.htm


#32

Dear Sudy, I must have missed something, What scriptures am I not happy with. I got the one from Ezekiel. Thank you for that one. I knew about it but didn’t know where it was. I also looked over the links you provided - very interesting. Thanks again.

Zeland


#33

Hi Zeland,

My reply was actually directed to Gazelam. Although the Catholic Church usually performs baptism by pouring… at least so in my area, I was pointing out that sprinkling is acceptable, too. He initially said that the Catholic Church has altered Our Lord’s teaching. The Ezekiel verse was to explain that our Lord’s teaching isn’t requiring full immersion, but water. He’s focusing on the wrong aspect, immersion isn’t the requirement.


#34

Thank you,

Good Job - well done.

zeland


#35

Well, I’m happy with all scriptures from God, I just don’t think this one foreshadows one of three future methods of Christian baptism. It seems to refer to cleansing the Israelites of their iniquities at that time.

So is Tertullian saying that baptism consists of being immersed and then subsequently sprinkled?

Here are a few links that are opposed to the notion that Ezekiel 36:25 foreshadows baptism by sprinkling.



I hope this helps…


#36

Thanks for your links. The thing is, though, you’re not reading Ezekiel in context. Verses 26 and 27 make it clear that they receive God’s Spirit in this sprinkling.
The Didache makes it clear that the important part is water, not immersion.

I have nothing further to offer you. If you still disagree, then we’ll just have to leave it there because I really don’t have either the time or the inclination to debate this further.

God bless. :slight_smile:


#37

Dear Sudy,

Your thoughts are mine also. As you said, the important thing is water, not the method. Also, thank you for mentioning the Didache, I had forgotten about that.

As St. Augustine said, if it were not for the authority of the Church I would not believe in the scriptures. Without the authority of the Catholic Church, the scriptures have no authority. Those “Burger King Christians” who wish to have it their way, and follow their own authority are already condemned because they wish to follow the error of the unwise (2 Peter 3:16-17).


#38

[quote=“gazelam, post:30, topic:490428, full:true”]

Thank you gazelam for doing me a big favor. I was tempted to jump into this discussion but your statement above absolutely proves to me the complete inanity of those non catholics arguing on this thread.
Yes, the Catholic Church PRODUCED the bible. It was compiled by the monk Jerome at the behest of the Vatican. He codified the various books and letters that had been written throughout history. Anyone with any understanding of the history of Sacred Scripture would know that. The Catholic Church has never claimed it WROTE the entire bible.

As charitably as I can say, your above quote is the most misinformed and outright erroneous (and probably antagonistic) I have ever seen on this forum.


#39

Dear Joey

If i stated this wrong, let me make a correction. I should have said the Catholic Church ASSEMBLED the bible. The Church wrote the New Testament, and choose the books of both the OT and the NT, and assembled those books into the collection we call the Bible. Your last statement is correct - The Catholic Church has never claimed it WROTE the entire bible.


#40

That’s interesting


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.