₦airaland Forum

Disenfranchised:
Your education anology and my posit on baptism is mismatched. Basics education is not a conscious decision a child can make for he or herself.

Baptism is dying to sin. It's not a gift 🎁 a father can pass to his child. A person to be baptized must make the decision and a child cannot.

Dtruthspeaker:
And this why they will always argue against the Catholic view. For you have pointed out the purposes of baptism but you guys err on its application.

You have said that baptism does not mean that the baptized has promised to abstain from sin. Meanwhile, baptism naturally means that for all intents and purposes, the baptized intends to abstain from sin.

So, something is wrong when baptism does not cleaned.

Then, secondly, on original sin, the Catholic is wrong again for generally, no person can be liable for the offences committed by another. ("no liability without fault”,).

Thus, no one is liable for Adam's offences and no man inherited that.

So, I argue that a baby does not need baptism since he has not yet committed any offence.

Baptism is for people who have committed offences.

immortalcrown:
In Pentecostal churches, baptism qualifies one to start receiving the holy communion. But in Catholic, baptism does not qualify one to start receiving the holy communion. This is why the arguement often takes place.

Baptism is a ritual performed to cleanse original sin and demonstrate Christian identity. Baptizing an infant is a way that parents give the baby Christian identity. The parents, by doing so, are saying, "We are laying a Christian foundation for our baby".

What makes the difference is confirmation which is done by only those who did infant baptism and have become cognisant enough to differentiate sin from good and have promised to abstain from sin. It is called confirmation because the person does it to show that he or she has examined, understood and chosen the Christian foundation laid for him or her. The person by doing so is saying "I have confirmed that the Christian foundation laid for me or I laid for myself is right for me and I am dedicated to it".

Let me use something non-spiritual to explain it further. A medical or nursing student starts wearing a white clothe. The white clothe does not make the student a qualified nurse or doctor. It only shows that the student has chosen the profession and is willing to develop himself or herself in that field. The student is using the clothe to say, "This is who I want to be". This illustrates baptism. Graduation is what will make the student a qualified nurse or doctor. The graduation can be used to illustrate the purpose of confirmation in the Catholic Church.

In the Catholic Church, members who become adults before getting baptised may not go through a separate formation for confirmation before receiving the holy communion. They can receive the holy communion the same day they get baptised. This is similar to Pentecostal members who start receiving communion immediately after being baptised because they had become old enough to differentiate sin from good before they went for the baptism. Members of the Catholic Church who did infant baptism are the ones that must go through confirmation when they become adults before they start receiving the holy communion. Biblically, there is no contradiction between the way the Catholic does it and the way the Pentecostal Churches do it. It is human sentiment that created the arguement.

paxonel:
You mean, if the child is not baptized, he or she does not have Christian identity?

Zionmdde:
What is you described is not baptism, baptism signifies death to sin, burial and resurrection in Christ. That's why you immerse the person in water (death) and raise him up (resurrection)

Now that process can only be valid without Roman's 10:9
And a baby cannot believe in Jesus nor confess his Lordship and therefore not qualified for salvation

immortalcrown:
A student can as well wear the school uniform and become the best student. Therefore, there's nothing wrong with a student wearing school uniform to school.

jossymekoos:
It pains me that people still talk about water baptism
Bible said that He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit......

Water baptism was a physical symbolic representation that we will receive the Holy Spirit
That Jesus did water baptism doesn't mean we should
Jesus lived in another dispensation different from the one he opened after his death and resurrection

Water baptism whether immersion or sprinkling, whether adult or children is NULL AND VOID

Thomasankara:
[/color]I believe that's true, because baptism is the outward identification with the body of Christ. Or some Chinese people without any religion or the freethinkers could pass for Christians?[color=#770077]

immortalcrown:
In Pentecostal churches, baptism qualifies one to start receiving the holy communion. But in Catholic, baptism does not qualify one to start receiving the holy communion. This is why the arguement often takes place.

Baptism is a ritual performed to cleanse original sin and demonstrate Christian identity. Baptizing an infant is a way that parents give the baby Christian identity. The parents, by doing so, are saying, "We are laying a Christian foundation for our baby".

What makes the difference is confirmation which is done by only those who did infant baptism and have become cognisant enough to differentiate sin from good and have promised to abstain from sin. It is called confirmation because the person does it to show that he or she has examined, understood and chosen the Christian foundation laid for him or her. The person by doing so is saying "I have confirmed that the Christian foundation laid for me or I laid for myself is right for me and I am dedicated to it".

Let me use something non-spiritual to explain it further. A medical or nursing student starts wearing a white clothe. The white clothe does not make the student a qualified nurse or doctor. It only shows that the student has chosen the profession and is willing to develop himself or herself in that field. The student is using the clothe to say, "This is who I want to be". This illustrates baptism. Graduation is what will make the student a qualified nurse or doctor. The graduation can be used to illustrate the purpose of confirmation in the Catholic Church.

In the Catholic Church, members who become adults before getting baptised may not go through a separate formation for confirmation before receiving the holy communion. They can receive the holy communion the same day they get baptised. This is similar to Pentecostal members who start receiving communion immediately after being baptised because they had become old enough to differentiate sin from good before they went for the baptism. Members of the Catholic Church who did infant baptism are the ones that must go through confirmation when they become adults before they start receiving the holy communion. Biblically, there is no contradiction between the way the Catholic does it and the way the Pentecostal Churches do it. It is human sentiment that created the arguement.

paranorman:
This argument are needless, that's because many of the folks arguing about baptism do not know it's historical context or religious significance. Baptism is not exclusive to Christianity, infact ancient Jews also practiced it as part of a purification ritual for 2 main reasons:

1. The Jewish Mikvah ( Ritual bath) - this was the ritual purity practiced by those who were ceremonially unclean, or priests before thier service to the ternacle or temple.

2. Proselyte baptism - practiced during conversion to Judaism. Now, this should make you understand, contextually, why the Jews questioned John the Baptist, and Jesus (and his disciples) , what or who gave them the right to baptise!

John (The Baptist) then came and then introduces the Baptism for Repentance, which was radical, contentious and controversial in the eyes of the Jewish religious leaders. For context, John the Baptist baptism was a one time thing, while the Jewish Mikvah was done as many times as needed for cleaning, especially.

Baptism is not compulsory! But if new converts are required to be baptised by any true bible believing church, then they should, as it won't kill them, as long as the understand that baptism forshows repentance, death of your old sinful ways, and renewed to a new life in Christ. It isn't complex. True repentance goes deep down and translates to spiritual and soulish transformation.

As for the Catholics, if the child baptism translates to the dedication of the child to Christ, then I do not see anything wrong with that. The child can always do a proper baptism if and when they come of age, adults who understand the implication of the finished work of Christ, grace and the detriment of sin. Similar to how charismatics and pentecostals dedicated and snoint their babies.

Make una dey chill, small. Christ will purge His bride thoroughly before He comes.

Dtruthspeaker:
Which means that the child must first become guilty for him to require repentance, confession etc.

And by nature and Natural Law children cannot be held guilty until they reach as certain age.

paxonel:
The question is, is the outward identification necessary for justification?
The answer is no.

It is only necessary for people to see.
But the very thing that we are Christians for which is to please God, it is not necessary

paxonel:
No, nothing is wrong about that.
And at the same time, nothing is also wrong about any student not wearing the school uniform in the context of religion

Thomasankara:
[/color]so what is confirmation?[color=#770077]

femi4:
lolz
Repentance is not in just living right but accepting christ as well

We have many people living right without accepting christ

MrGerald:
We are conceived in iniquity and in sin our mother gave birth to us, so catholic church was not wrong, again we are suffering for the sin of Adam and eve too

Dtruthspeaker:
Living right means that they first lived wrong, then they repented and all those things

Thomasankara:
[/color] could you please tell me the creed jesus believed in, before his baptism [color=#770077]

immortalcrown:
You are confusing yourself.

First of all, it seems you do not believe in original sin. No adult has stopped committing sins after being baptised. Yes, baptism is meant to discourage sin. But baptism does not mean that sin has become impossible in the person's life. So, The main significance of baptism is cleansing of original sin. Baptism is a ritual that demonstrates belief. Those who believe in original sin accept infant baptism for babies.

Dtruthspeaker:
Before, the white bandits brought their writing down of laws, the Yorubas, ibos, Benins, Ijaws etc were already practicing all the laws you know today as Criminal Law, Law of contracts and upholding the rights of a child.

And no where have you seen a child younger than 7years being held criminally responsible.

And even from back then till tomorrow you would hear "leave am. Na pikin. When hin grow, hin go understand say dis things no good as you dey teach am".

And go and examine the Bible, no where did you see God or anyone put a child on trial.

From Genesis to revelations, they are all adults or young people. No child

immortalcrown:
What you wrote here explains why the Catholic does not attack other churches for not accepting infant baptism but other churches attack the Catholic for accepting infant baptism. So, you have judged yourself.

paxonel:
Baptism is Baptism whether it is child or adult
It doesn't matter

Zionmdde:
I don't get your question

Also tell me how Jesus was baptized