Proof we have a soul.

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#183 Aug 16, 2013
little lamb wrote:
<quoted text>
Because Jesus set the model...that is why Jesus is called the chief cornerstone...it is the stone all the other stones have to measure up to and be in line with.
There is no other cornerstone.
Christian Baptism

The Fundamentalist contention that baptizo always means immersion is an oversimplification. This is especially true because in Christian usage the word had a highly particular meaning distinct from the term’s ordinary, everyday usage.

The same principle can be seen with other special Christian terms, such as "Trinity" and "agape" (divine love), that were originally ordinary Greek words with no special religious significance. The earliest evidence of anyone referring to God as a "Trinity" is a letter by Theophilus of Antioch (Ad Autolycum [A.D. 181]). Before the Christian usage, a "trinity" (triad in Greek) was simply any group of three things.

However, as Christians made theological use of the term, it quickly gained a new, technical sense, referring specifically to the three persons of the Godhead. When Christians professed that God is a "Triad," they did not mean a group of three gods, but one God in three persons. Here, an everyday word was being used in a special, theological sense.

The same is true of agape, originally a general term for any sort of "love" very much like the English word. But it quickly became used in Christian circles as the name of a common fellowship (love) meal among Christians (cf. Jude 12).

In the same way, baptizo acquired a specialized Christian usage distinct from its original meaning. In fact, it already had a complex history of specifically religious usages even before Christians adopted it. Long before Jesus’ day, Gentile converts to Judaism were "baptized" as well as circumcised. Then John the Baptist performed a "baptism of repentance" for Jews as a dramatic prophetic gesture indicating that they were as much in need of conversion as pagans. Through these usages baptizo acquired associations of initiation, conversion, and repentance.

Given this history, it was natural for Jesus and his followers to use the same word for Christian baptism, though it was not identical either to the Jewish baptism or to that of John. But it is completely misguided to try to determine the meaning of the word in its Christian sense merely on the basis of ordinary secular usage. It would be like thinking that the doctrine of the Trinity is polytheism or that the New Testament exhortation to "love one another" means only to be fond of each other. To understand what Christian baptism entailed, we must examine not what the word meant in other contexts, but what it meant and how it was practiced in a Christian context.

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/baptism-immers...

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#184 Aug 16, 2013
little lamb wrote:
<quoted text>
Because Jesus set the model...that is why Jesus is called the chief cornerstone...it is the stone all the other stones have to measure up to and be in line with.
There is no other cornerstone.
Physical Difficulties

After Peter’s first sermon, three thousand people were baptized in Jerusalem (Acts 2:41). Archaeologists have demonstrated there was no sufficient water supply for so many to have been immersed. Even if there had been, the natives of Jerusalem would scarcely have let their city’s water supply be polluted by three thousand unwashed bodies plunging into it. These people must have been baptized by pouring or sprinkling.

Even today practical difficulties can render immersion nearly or entirely impossible for some individuals: for example, people with certain medical conditions—the bedridden; quadriplegics; individuals with tracheotomies (an opening into the airway in the throat) or in negative pressure ventilators (iron lungs). Again, those who have recently undergone certain procedures (such as open-heart surgery) cannot be immersed, and may not wish to defer baptism until their recovery (for example, if they are to undergo further procedures).

Other difficulties arise in certain environments. For example, immersion may be nearly or entirely impossible for desert nomads or Eskimos. Or consider those in prison—not in America, where religious freedom gives prisoners the right to be immersed if they desire—but in a more hostile setting, such as a Muslim regime, where baptisms must be done in secret, without adequate water for immersion.

What are we to do in these and similar cases? Shall we deny people the sacrament because immersion is impractical or impossible for them? Ironically, the Fundamentalist, who acknowledges that baptism is commanded but thinks it isn’t essential for salvation, may make it impossible for many people to be baptized at all in obedience to God’s command. The Catholic, who believes baptism confers grace and is normatively necessary for salvation, maintains that God wouldn’t require a form of baptism that, for some people, is impossible.

--same source

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#185 Aug 16, 2013
Baptism in the Early Church

That the early Church permitted pouring instead of immersion is demonstrated by the Didache, a Syrian liturgical manual that was widely circulated among the churches in the first few centuries of Christianity, perhaps the earliest Christian writing outside the New Testament.

The Didache was written around A.D. 70 and, though not inspired, is a strong witness to the sacramental practice of Christians in the apostolic age. In its seventh chapter, the Didache reads, "Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water [that is, in running water, as in a river]. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." These instructions were composed either while some of the apostles and disciples were still alive or during the next generation of Christians, and they represent an already established custom.

The testimony of the Didache is seconded by other early Christian writings. Hippolytus of Rome said, "If water is scarce, whether as a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available" (The Apostolic Tradition, 21 [A.D. 215]). Pope Cornelius I wrote that as Novatian was about to die, "he received baptism in the bed where he lay, by pouring" (Letter to Fabius of Antioch [A.D. 251]; cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6:4311).

Cyprian advised that no one should be "disturbed because the sick are poured upon or sprinkled when they receive the Lord’s grace" (Letter to a Certain Magnus 69:12 [A.D. 255]). Tertullian described baptism by saying that it is done "with so great simplicity, without pomp, without any considerable novelty of preparation, and finally, without cost, a man is baptized in water, and amid the utterance of some few words, is sprinkled, and then rises again, not much (or not at all) the cleaner" (On Baptism, 2 [A.D. 203]). Obviously, Tertullian did not consider baptism by immersion the only valid form, since he says one is only sprinkled and thus comes up from the water "not much (or not at all) the cleaner."
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/baptism-immers...

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#186 Aug 16, 2013
Ancient Christian Mosaics Show Pouring

Then there is the artistic evidence. Much of the earliest Christian artwork depicts baptism—but not baptism by immersion! If the recipient of the sacrament is in a river, he is shown standing in the river while water is poured over his head from a cup or shell. Tile mosaics in ancient churches and paintings in the catacombs depict baptism by pouring. Baptisteries in early cemeteries are clear witnesses to baptisms by infusion. The entire record of the early Church—as shown in the New Testament, in other writings, and in monumental evidence—indicates the mode of baptism was not restricted to immersion.

Other archaeological evidence confirms the same thing. An early Christian baptistery was found in a church in Jesus’ hometown of Nazareth, yet this baptistery, which dates from the second century, was too small and narrow in which to immerse a person.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/baptism-immers...
little lamb

South Yarra, Australia

#187 Aug 16, 2013
Jesus told the religious Leaders of his day..that the only sign they would be given is the sign of Jonah..

And Jesus likened his death and resurrection to Jonah...

Jonah 2 [3] When you threw me to the depths into the heart of the open sea

Then the very river encircled me . All your breakers and waves - over me they passed

[5] Waters encircled me clear to the soul , the watery deep itself kept enclosing me..."

So our baptism as it is into Jesus death..is full immersion into water as it pictures the dying of Jesus...and our baptism is being buried
[ completely covered] into his death..

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#188 Aug 16, 2013
little lamb wrote:
Jesus told the religious Leaders of his day..that the only sign they would be given is the sign of Jonah..
And Jesus likened his death and resurrection to Jonah...
Jonah 2 [3] When you threw me to the depths into the heart of the open sea
Then the very river encircled me . All your breakers and waves - over me they passed
[5] Waters encircled me clear to the soul , the watery deep itself kept enclosing me..."
So our baptism as it is into Jesus death..is full immersion into water as it pictures the dying of Jesus...and our baptism is being buried
[ completely covered] into his death..
W. A. Swift
Having studied the Bible and writings of learned men for more than forty-five years on the subject contained in this little booklet, during which time I made a trip through Bible lands, I am thoroughly and clearly convinced that pouring or sprinkling water upon a person in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, is the proper mode of baptism, pouring and sprinkling coming from the same root word. To reinforce this opinion I am herewith giving some statements from some of the most learned Greek scholars. The first is from Robinsons Greek and English Lexicon, considered one of the best on the New Testament. He says: "In the earliest Latin versions of the New Testament, as for example, the Itala, which Augustine regarded as the best of all and which goes back apparently to the second century and to usage connected with apostolic age, the Greek verb baptizo is uniformly given in the Latin form baptizo, and is never translated by immergo or any like word; showing that there was something in the rite of baptism to which the latter did not correspond. The baptismal fonts still found among the ruins of the most ancient Greek churches in Palestine, as at Tekoa and Gophna, and going back apparently to very early times, arc not large enough to admit of the baptism of adult persons by immersion; and were obviously never intended for that use."
Dr. Rice (in his Debate with Campbell) says: "I have now examined every passage in the Bible and in the Apocryphal writing of the Jews, where the word baptizo is used in a literal sense, without reference to the ordinance of Christian baptism, and my clear conviction is, that there is not one instance in which it can be proved to mean, immerse; that in every instance, except, perhaps one, which may be doubtful, it can be, and has been, proved to express the application of water to the person or thing by pouring or sprinkling."

I clipped the following from The Christian Standard, one of the leading papers of the Christian Church, dated February 13, 1932: "It seems to me that the word immersion should never be used in the discussion of Christian baptism. Now for proof: First of all, it is not a Bible term; it is never used in the American Version or Revised Version." Here in the stronghold of immersionists, among Alexander Campbells followers, my contention is admitted.

John The Baptist Baptizing Jesus "IN JORDAN" This picture was found in Bible lands among the relics of the early Christians. This picture so nearly repesents the idea of water baptism thoughout the whole Bible, that we are using in to reinforce the subject of this book.
Dr. Jacob Ditzler, one of the greatest Greek scholars of modern days, says emphatically in his writings that there is no Greek word for immersion in the New Testament.
http://www.imarc.cc/baptize/waswift.html

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#189 Aug 16, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>In Acts 1:4–5 Jesus charged his disciples "not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said,‘you heard from me, for John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’" Did this mean they would be "immersed" in the Spirit? No: three times Acts 2 states that the Holy Spirit was poured out on them when Pentecost came (2:17, 18, 33, emphasis added). Later Peter referred to the Spirit falling upon them, and also on others after Pentecost, explicitly identifying these events with the promise of being "baptized with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 11:15–17). These passages demonstrate that the meaning of baptizo is broad enough to include "pouring."
baptizo acquired a specialized Christian usage distinct from its original meaning. In fact, it already had a complex history of specifically religious usages even before Christians adopted it. Long before Jesus’ day, Gentile converts to Judaism were "baptized" as well as circumcised. Then John the Baptist performed a "baptism of repentance" for Jews as a dramatic prophetic gesture indicating that they were as much in need of conversion as pagans. Through these usages baptizo acquired associations of initiation, conversion, and repentance.
Given this history, it was natural for Jesus and his followers to use the same word for Christian baptism, though it was not identical either to the Jewish baptism or to that of John. But it is completely misguided to try to determine the meaning of the word in its Christian sense merely on the basis of ordinary secular usage. It would be like thinking that the doctrine of the Trinity is polytheism or that the New Testament exhortation to "love one another" means only to be fond of each other. To understand what Christian baptism entailed, we must examine not what the word meant in other contexts, but what it meant and how it was practiced in a Christian context.
Inner and Outer Baptism
One important.aspect of Christian baptism in the New Testament is the clear relationship between being baptized with water and being "baptized with the Holy Spirit", or "born again." This tract is primarily concerned with the mode of baptism, not its effects [Footnote: For more on the relationship between baptism and rebirth, see John 3:5; Acts 2:38, 19:2–3, 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; Colossians 2:11–12; Titus 3:5; and 1 Peter 3:21; and also the Catholic Answers tract Baptismal Grace.]; but even non-Catholic Christians must admit that the New Testament clearly associates water baptism with Spirit baptism and rebirth (even if they do not interpret this relationship as cause and effect).
Right from the beginning, as soon as the Holy Spirit was given on Pentecost, water and Spirit went hand in hand: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38).
In Acts 10:44, the first Gentiles to whom Peter preached received the Holy Spirit even before their water baptism. This is always possible, for God is free to operate outside the sacraments as well as within them. In this case it was fitting for the Spirit to be given before baptism, in order to show God’s acceptance of believing Gentiles. Even under these circumstances, however, the connection to water baptism is still evident from Peter’s response: "Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (Acts 10:47).
continued:
None of which teaches 'sprinkling'.

Acts 8:38 (NKJV)
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.
Cujo

Leask, Canada

#190 Aug 16, 2013
little lamb wrote:
Highly Evolved made a stupid statement
" science has proved we have no soul'
Well it is written
Leviticus 17 [14] " For the soul of every sort of flesh is its BLOOD , by the soul in it......"
The soul is in the BLOOD..
If you had no soul , you would have no BLOOD.
That is why sin can affect your SOUL..because diseases can pollute your blood.
Think of how AIDS affects the blood [soul]
kidney diseases that send poisons into the blood stream etc etc etc..
The only thing you proved, is that you and many Christians still do not know what constitutes as proof. Here's a hint, scripture is not proof of anything!

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#191 Aug 16, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
None of which teaches 'sprinkling'.
Acts 8:38 (NKJV)
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.
How do you know they didn't sprinkle him when they went to the river? They were probably on a cliff and had to go down into the water at the end of the valley...

Geeze, you guys even interpret the LITERAL your own unique way to makeup this religion you have. The NIV New King James Version is a rewritten bible, too...to satisfy the republican party political cult.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#192 Aug 16, 2013
Cujo wrote:
Here's a hint, scripture is not proof of anything!
Your belief in Hell fire is not required for your eternal residency therein. They will find you. This is the terminal generation.

Matthew 13:49-50 (NKJV)
49 So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, 50 and cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth."

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#193 Aug 16, 2013
Cookie_Parker wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know they didn't sprinkle him when they went to the river? They were probably on a cliff and had to go down into the water at the end of the valley...
Geeze, you guys even interpret the LITERAL your own unique way to makeup this religion you have. The NIV New King James Version is a rewritten bible, too...to satisfy the republican party political cult.
"down into the water"

DUH!

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#194 Aug 16, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
None of which teaches 'sprinkling'.
Acts 8:38 (NKJV)
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.
You, then, have no clue as to what baptism actually is.

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#195 Aug 16, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
"down into the water"
DUH!
And, here you are still referring to the baptism given by John, the Baptist, which was a Jewish washing ritual, not a Christian Baptism.

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#197 Aug 16, 2013
Asch Paradigm_ wrote:
<quoted text>Please show us one scripture where God commands that gentiles be baptized different from Jews? I will read it. Give the verse.
I was taught from other Christian churches that baptism must be by immersion, but the Catholics sprinkle. I see nowhere in the Bible (that I can find) where it specifically states there is a certain way to be baptized, just that is says "by water". Can you tell me if there is any material on the matter or is that an "open to interpretation" thing?

In the Didache, which is one of the earliest, if not the earliest, non-scriptural Christian writings, it says this about Baptism: "The procedure for baptizing is as follows: after repeating all that has been said, immerse in running water 'In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost'. If no running water is available, immerse in ordinary water...If neither is practicable, then pour water three times on the head 'In the name of the Father...."

Again, this is not Scripture, but this is a window into the practices of the early Christians who learned directly from the Apostles and those appointed by the Apostles to leadership roles within the Church. They were baptizing folks by immersion and by pouring, or sprinkling.

Ezekiel 36:25-27, "I will SPRINKLE clean water upon you and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, 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 put My Spirit within you..." What do you think is being talked about here? Water...a new spirit...cleansed of your uncleannesses? Baptism...by sprinkling.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say one has to be immersed in order to be "officially" baptized. People will point to Jesus’ baptism accounts which say that He “came up out of the water,” and use that to claim He was immersed. However, if you read all four of the accounts of Jesus' baptism side-by-side, you can make a very strong case that when it says, Jesus “came up out of the water," it does not mean He came up from under the water (immersion), but rather that it means He came up out of the river onto the bank. If you had a child swimming in a pool and you called to them and they “came up out of the water,” what would that mean? That your child was underwater but is now above water, or that he had come out of the pool altogether? It would be the latter.

Finally, in 1 Cor 15:29, Paul notes that there were folks baptizing on behalf of the dead. And, he doesn't specifically repudiate the practice. So, the Scripture tells us that there were Christians baptizing folks on behalf of the dead and nowhere does the Scripture say this should not happen. Paul himself offers no criticism of the practice. Why then does anyone believe that baptizing on behalf of the dead is not an acceptable Christian practice? Why? Because of the authority of the Church to decide such matters. Just as the Church can say that baptism on behalf of the dead is not acceptable, in spite of it clearly being practiced by some Christians in Scripture, so the Church can decide on the method of baptism. It has Christ's own authority to bind and loose on earth. And, what it binds and looses on earth, is bound and loosed in Heaven.

By the way, one can always elect to be fully immersed when baptized into the Catholic Church, and I know of folks who have done so. In other words, immersion is not a practice that is forbidden by the Church, it is just one that is not used as often as pouring.
http://www.biblechristiansociety.com/apologet...

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#199 Aug 16, 2013
_Fishers Of Men_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Baptism is purely symbolic, and you're all wet. There are NO rituals man may do to be saved, not a single one.
j
nephie, you've gone goofy.
Stop it.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#203 Aug 17, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>And, here you are still referring to the baptism given by John, the Baptist, which was a Jewish washing ritual, not a Christian Baptism.
Show us YOUR baptism in the NT.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#204 Aug 17, 2013
_Fishers Of Men_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Baptism is purely symbolic, and you're all wet. There are NO rituals man may do to be saved, not a single one.
j
I agree. I wasn't baptized in Jesus' Name to be saved. I was baptized because I was saved and wanted to obey God.

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#205 Aug 17, 2013
dollarsbill wrote:
<quoted text>
Show us YOUR baptism in the NT.
BAPTISM

In order to show that Bible verses are the same in the Protestant Bible, all verses in Defend Your Faith is taken from the King James Bible.

How did they Baptize in the First Century? Before we speak of how they baptized in the First Century, let us look at why they baptized. First of all, non-Catholics believe that to be "saved" one must claim Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. It is true, we must all claim Christ to be our personal Lord and Savior (and none other than He), however, there is more to baptism than what the non-Catholic would choose to believe.

John the Baptist, baptized with water symbolizing the cleansing of sins. John stated to the Pharisees that his baptism was not the final standard for baptism,(Jn. 1:26) that someone would come (Jesus) that would do more than baptize with water. The verse non-Catholics like to quote, John 3:3, is not completed by Jesus, or let us say interpreted until verse 3:5. Let us look two verses ahead at John 3:5. In John 3:5, Nicodemus is confused about being born again. Jesus clarifies what He states to Nicodemus stating:

(John 3:5)- "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

Here we see that being "born again" means the sacrament of baptism! If the non-Catholic would only read a little further he would find the true meaning of being "born again." Catholics do not believe that works alone will get them to Heaven. What Catholics do believe is that works accompanied by faith and God's grace will get them into Heaven. There are so many verses in the Bible stating that entrance into Heaven is not as simple as saying "I accept Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior." Let us see what the Bible has to say about salvation:

(Phil 2:12)-"…work out your own salvation with fear and trembling."

(Rom 2:5-6)- "…the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds"

(James 2:14)- "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?"

Ok, so what is the point? The point is that in order for man to be "saved," to have eternal life, he must be baptized with both water and the Holy Spirit and that being baptized is what secures eternal salvation. Water is not the only means of "saving" but there is also the spirit that "saves". The sacrament and meaning of baptism, according to the words of Jesus, is not whether one is immersed or not, or how much water is poured on the head of the person being baptized, but instead it is a sign of purification, new life, and a new relationship with God.
continued:

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#206 Aug 17, 2013
Would Jesus be so unmerciful as to not give us the graces he promises, only because the we were not completely dunked under water? I don't think so! Jesus is a merciful God; it is the intent that he sees, not the amount of water. Besides, nowhere in the Bible does it state that Jesus baptized, thus he did not leave us an example to follow. If Jesus intended that total immersion be the only way a baptism is valid, wouldn't he have made this clear to his apostles? Instead he tells his apostles in Mt. 28:19 to baptize in the names of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (this he makes clear).

Now on to the baptisms of the First Century, according to Acts 9:17-18 Paul was baptized in a house. In Acts 16:33 Paul baptized his jailer within the prison. The argument of immersion is deceptive because in baptism, water is a symbolization of cleansing. In one of the earliest known Christian writings "The Didache" it states that immersion is not the only means of baptism.

Didache [7,1] "In regard to Baptism - baptize thus: After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. If you have no living water, then baptize in other water; and if you are not able in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

As you see from the excerpt taken from the Didache; baptism can be valid without having the individual totally immersed. My question to a non-Catholic would be, If baptism is merely a rule or practice to follow and not a sacrament within their respective churches, and has no effect on salvation; why do they make such a big fuss whether someone is totally immersed or not?

Where does it say in the Bible that only adults should be baptized, not infants? Nowhere! In Col. 2:11-12, Paul shows us a parallel between circumcision and baptism.

Then why is there baptism of adults in the New Testament? Simple! The new converts were already grown adults! Let us look at some verses that show otherwise:

(Acts 2:38-39) "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afar off…"

(1Cor. 1:16) "And I baptize also the household of Stephanas…"

(Acts 16:15) "And when she was baptized and her household, she besought us…"

Non-Catholics state that the act of baptism is a waste because the infant is not capable of knowing what is happening and has not yet received the Lord as their Savior. Let us take a look at the Jewish infants that were being circumcised. Did these infants know that at the moment they were being circumcised, they were making a covenant with God? There is no validity to the non-Catholic claim that only adults should be baptized.
http://www.concernedcatholics.org/dbaptism.ht...
little lamb

South Yarra, Australia

#207 Aug 17, 2013
basic root meaning of the Greek words for 'baptize' and baptism is immerse/immersion

Greek BAPRIZEIN translated correctly by the English word BAPTIZE...means to immerse.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
PAUL OUR FATHER . 1Cor 4: 15 (Feb '16) 8 min I love Jesus 97
Scientific Proof Of GOD(for dummies) 25 min 15th Dalai Lama 2,425
News Religion, higher education and critical thinking (Aug '15) 55 min 15th Dalai Lama 9,555
2000 Year old TOMB OF JESUS and no one speaks a... 1 hr Jesus is 8
Design, Nowhere Evident 2 hr 15th Dalai Lama 502
Cookie's Place (Oct '13) 2 hr I love Jesus 20,514
A God Who Disagrees With The Data 3 hr messianic114 453
More from around the web