tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post1152280115990687981..comments2024-03-28T08:30:20.260+01:00Comments on The Ugley Vicar: Baptism, ritual and actualAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03590979027426082714noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-87252505494392984182023-09-24T19:05:14.293+01:002023-09-24T19:05:14.293+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.maiky machavyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03520557571317998376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-66005326065564114862022-04-08T04:09:53.702+01:002022-04-08T04:09:53.702+01:00Thank you! I learn lots of information from your p...Thank you! I learn lots of information from your post and I like your written style. I hope more unique post from your blog. <a href="https://www.sportstototop.com" title="스포츠토토탑" rel="nofollow">스포츠토토탑</a><br />sportstototopcomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678481457908373402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-37785659848084469262021-12-16T07:11:17.477+01:002021-12-16T07:11:17.477+01:00Your blog is very valuable to others and you can s...Your blog is very valuable to others and you can see our blog is about to printing services . Being the main name in the printer business, HP doesn't frustrate its clients with its capacities and highlights and you can try it <a href="https://wearableworld.co/hp-deskjet-3755/" rel="nofollow">hp deskjet 3755</a><br />john nicholashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14085366713268243839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-62094479035520981162020-12-06T12:22:29.129+01:002020-12-06T12:22:29.129+01:00Omg I Finally Got Helped !! I'm so excited ri...Omg I Finally Got Helped !! I'm so excited right now, I just have to share my testimony on this Forum.. The feeling of being loved takes away so much burden from our shoulders. I had all this but I made a big mistake when I cheated on my wife with another woman and my wife left me for over 4 months after she found out.. I was lonely, sad and devastated. Luckily I was directed to a very powerful spell caster Dr Emu who helped me cast a spell of reconciliation on our Relationship and he brought back my wife and now she loves me far more than ever.. I'm so happy with life now. Thank you so much Dr Emu, kindly Contact Dr Emu Today and get any kind of help you want.. Via Email emutemple@gmail.com or Call/WhatsApp +2347012841542Jason Bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16896927184869020575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-88211529866028710662020-04-18T20:24:48.132+01:002020-04-18T20:24:48.132+01:00
I want to give a big thanks to a great spell cast...<br />I want to give a big thanks to a great spell caster commonly known as DR TAKUTA for the great spiritual prayers he did in my life by bringing my ex-lover back to me after many months of breakup and loneliness. With this, I am convinced that you are sent to this word to rescue people from heartbreaks and also to help us get the solution to every relationship problem. for those of you out there who have one relationship problem or the other why not contact DR TAKUTA. that is the best place you can solve all your problems, including a lack of jobs and promotions, binding and marriage spells, divorce and attraction spells, anxiety and depression problems, good luck and lotto spells, fertility, and pregnancy spells, and also the business success and customer increase, winning court cases and many more. contact him at takutaspellalter@gmail.com or contact mobile contact +2348158676990<br />bettyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06104426779486727252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-70061640033527011282014-06-03T01:19:34.840+01:002014-06-03T01:19:34.840+01:00This is very problematic. If you are asserting a d...This is very problematic. If you are asserting a difference between the ritual and the reality of baptism, you are saying that many, if not most, of those "ritually" baptised in infancy have not really been baptised at all. You are at least shedding and spreading doubt in people about their own salvation and the efficacy of their baptisms. The obvious corollary of your idea is that one might be ritually re-baptised, a teaching which every mainstream church except the Baptists has rejected, for reasons which I am sure are well-enough known not to need repeating here. <br />Your idea also denies the efficacy of the sacraments instituted by Christ and defined by the Church of England, in common with the wider Catholic Church, as the visible and effective signs of an invisible grace. According to classical Anglican teaching, the sacrament of Baptism is effective in regenerating the recipient regardless of his or her ability to profess the Christian faith: it is by God's grace alone, given to the Church and her ministers to impart. We must not divorce the outward sign from the inner grace. <br />Forgive my temerity, but it does seem problematic to me that an Anglican priest should be teaching Baptist doctrine. If nothing else, it will cause great confusion to any of your flock who ever go to another Anglican church and find that you have taught them something contrary to the Church's teachings. I don't mean to be nasty or offensive in saying this, mind!Fr Thomas Planthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16937452994696714750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-65797842103081147352014-06-03T01:15:55.620+01:002014-06-03T01:15:55.620+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Fr Thomas Planthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16937452994696714750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-79980298045456180642013-11-09T22:04:23.173+01:002013-11-09T22:04:23.173+01:00Basically how would you ever know that you have pe...Basically how would you ever know that you have persevered enough?<br /><br />And if you have persevered .. say.. a lot!. Does this mean God owes you faith/salvation/whatever, for what you have done?<br /><br />Phil<br /><br />Phil Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09151392742310244391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-29810679207023274212013-11-09T21:48:58.133+01:002013-11-09T21:48:58.133+01:00John
"Actual baptism is only guaranteed to t...John<br /><br />"Actual baptism is only guaranteed to those who persevere in faith"<br /><br />If this is true then we can facilitate our own salvation. Are we saved because we chose to believe? Or are we saved because we are chosen by God?<br /><br />The Bible repeatedly states the latter. Why else would we chose to believe? Baptism of whatever kind is not necessary therefore for salvation.<br /><br />Phil<br /><br />Phil Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09151392742310244391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-19170527771274515822013-11-06T01:46:44.909+01:002013-11-06T01:46:44.909+01:00John,
As the scripture texts you've quoted ind...John,<br />As the scripture texts you've quoted indicate, baptism in the NT is what I would call "realistic"; i.e. it is regarded as promising and even conveying what is attributed to it. Therefore, I think your conjectural distinction between ritual and actual baptism is not a helpful way to go. Better to allow baptism as a means of grace to stand and attribute the personal failure to persevere in baptismal grace to falling away from faith and rejecting that grace - hence Paul's warning, which does not imply a defect in baptism but in personal faith. I do like your conclusion, though, which I suspect is not emphasised enough outside of Lutheran circles, that baptism means a daily dying to sin and rising to new life in Christ (cf. Luther's Small Catechism). Thanks for your reflection and the opportunity to react to them. https://www.blogger.com/profile/08978657816767706667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-11067694155079345082013-11-05T14:10:23.817+01:002013-11-05T14:10:23.817+01:00Graham - I'm hearing you and John saying the s...Graham - I'm hearing you and John saying the same kind of thing: that there are two elements: "Spirit baptism" or "actual baptism" on the one hand, and "water baptism" or "ritual baptism" on the other hand, the latter being merely illustrative of the former.<br /><br />Questions of baptism and the church are very closely related. On the Day of Pentecost, about 3000 were "added", and presumably that means they were baptised (Acts 2:41; see 2:47; 5:14; 11:24). When Paul writes to a church and mentions baptism, he seems to assume that all of the recipients have been baptised, almost as if baptism marked someone out as having been admitted to membership of the church. Baptism has implications for church order; it's not just an opportunity for someone to profess their personal faith.Anthony Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09804010353542590614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-28664935253823394712013-11-05T13:37:14.215+01:002013-11-05T13:37:14.215+01:00Anthony "I'm still wrestling with this. I...Anthony "I'm still wrestling with this. Is there any sense in which baptism with water actually admits someone to the church?"<br /><br />A good question and one that I would also ask. It seems to me that John is complicating the relatively simple doctrine of Christian baptism by his references to "actual baptism" and "ritual baptism". <br /> I ask: why not stick to the two biblical elements, namely - firstly, Spirit baptism which is the gift given to every believer upon a true faith in Christ, and secondly, its symbolic counterpart of water baptism? The second (which I think John calls "ritual) merely illustrates the reality of the first - that is the 'new birth'.<br /><br />Others in a previous thread have made the same claim that baptism somehow has a primary meaning of "admittance to the church", but nowhere in scripture AFAIK is this emphasis found. (it begs also the question as to what is "church", but we won't go down there at the moment!). If as John rightly affirms he means that the believer is incorporated into the body of Christ, then that simple definition is IMO sufficient.<br /> Perhaps this terminology - i.e. "the church", is used by those who believe that infant baptism is the mechanism by which this becomes a reality ? (we are back to the error of infant baptism once again - ground already covered ).<br /><br />John seems to further confuse the simple symbol of baptism by his statement:<br /><br />"Actual baptism is only guaranteed to those who persevere in faith"<br />I don't know what he means by that!. Surely perseverance in the faith is the outcome of God's continuing grace, obedience, and the exercise of faith in Christ and nothing to do with baptism, or its being "guarenteed" in this way?. (cf. Paul in Gal 2:20). <br />It seemed that the writer to the Hebrews considered that believers do not profit from attempting to lay again foundational truths, such as "the doctrine of baptisms" laying on of hands, & etc. and that there are far greater priorities in the Christian life ! (Hebrews 6:1,2). graham woodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13104720099020515294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-82612876233743535182013-11-05T12:25:44.437+01:002013-11-05T12:25:44.437+01:00John - I'm still wrestling with this. Is there...John - I'm still wrestling with this. Is there <i>any</i> sense in which baptism with water actually admits someone to the church?<br /><br />It seems that the answer you would give is that there are two churches and two baptisms. There is the visible "church" of the water-baptised, and there is the invisible "church" of the Spirit-baptised. Ritual baptism admits you to the institutional church, and actual (Spirit) baptism admits you to the actual (invisible/true) church.<br /><br />I'm reluctant to separate what God seems to have joined together. In the incarnation he seems to have joined together the invisible and the visible in a way that will not be fully experienced by the whole created order until the resurrection. But we live in the already-and-not-yet, and it seems that the visible church on earth - at least <i>partially</i>, and at least in <i>some</i> sense - actually partakes in this joining together of the invisible and the visible, as the body of the still-incarnate Christ. We can try to make a sharp distinction between the visible church and the invisible church, or between water baptism and Spirit baptism, but the New Testament seems to blur that distinction, in ways that are hard to grasp. So Paul writes to a visible congregation of water-baptised people, and speaks to them as though they are actually a part of the invisible, Spirit-baptised church - without any hint that he considers the visible church and water baptism to be nothing more than visual aids, pointing toward the invisible reality.<br /><br />Thoughts...?Anthony Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09804010353542590614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-48200805641251730972013-11-05T00:13:22.187+01:002013-11-05T00:13:22.187+01:00"(Acts 10:45)
Peter then reasoned "can a..."(Acts 10:45)<br />Peter then reasoned "can anyone keep these people from being baptised with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have". - Graham Wood -<br /><br />Precisely, Graham. Although the neophyte Christians had already 'tasted' of the Holy Spirit; they were still required, by Peter, to submit to Water Baptism. Thids should give John Richardson a clearer indication of the importance of Water Baptism, which is a ritualised adoption by God in Christ - a basic Christening.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-36506167898119330552013-11-04T18:17:30.476+01:002013-11-04T18:17:30.476+01:00Unconvinced.Unconvinced.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03590979027426082714noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-88264670763421523622013-11-04T15:08:12.037+01:002013-11-04T15:08:12.037+01:00Interesting comparing NIV with ESV on 10:47. NIV g...Interesting comparing NIV with ESV on 10:47. NIV gives the impression that the people have been baptised with the Spirit, so therefore they should be baptised with water. ESV has "Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" which isn't so conclusive.<br /><br />But 11:16 is probably the relevant verse, Peter speaking about Cornelius et al receiving the Spirit, prior to being baptised: "And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’"<br /><br />This does seem to suggest that Cornelius et al. were baptised with the Holy Spirit before they were baptised with water, as there was no water involved on the Day of Pentecost when the original disciples were "baptised with the Holy Spirit" (1:5). I suppose Leithart's comments on that verse are relevant (see link in my previous comment), though I'm not finding that part of his case fully persuasive.Anthony Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09804010353542590614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-47751014373141411182013-11-04T13:47:40.696+01:002013-11-04T13:47:40.696+01:00Anthony. Interpreting what occurred on the Day of...Anthony. Interpreting what occurred on the Day of Pentecost, the Apostle Peter referred to the Holy Spirit being poured out (Acts 2:33).<br />When Cornelius' household was given the gift of the Spirit, the Jewish believers with Peter were astounded that "the Holy Spirit was also poured out on the Gentiles" (Acts 10:45)<br />Peter then reasoned "can anyone keep these people from being baptised with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have".<br />Whilst the two baptisms are not identical, there is then a direct connection between Spirit baptism and water baptism illustrated here. graham woodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13104720099020515294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-76996933232626526972013-11-04T11:00:57.338+01:002013-11-04T11:00:57.338+01:00John - what do you make of the idea that baptism i...John - what do you make of the idea that baptism in/by the Spirit <i>is</i> water baptism? See Peter Leithart (and, he say, Calvin) <a href="http://www.credenda.org/archive/issues/17-2liturgia.php" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />Anthony Smith<br />Bebington, WirralAnthony Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09804010353542590614noreply@blogger.com