Date: 2018-04-14 05:31
The Catholic Church also teaches that anyone that has received an invalid baptism would need to receive a valid baptism. So we don’t disagree about the point that invalid baptism necessitates a valid baptism. But Calvin believed that infants could be validly baptized, and your particular “Reformed Baptist” sect does not believe that infants can be validly baptized. How did that break from Calvin’s doctrine come into existence among “Calvinists”? That is the very question that Dr. Anders asks:
I am telling you this because I don 8767 t know how things will work out around you, but I am assured that they will work out well for you and for the good of your family.
8. You seem to have an incredibly superstitious view of the sacraments. How do you reconcile this with 8775 by faith alone? 8776 Seemingly the primary ground you have to refute 8775 by faith alone 8776 (for the sake of argument) can be found in James, and James doesn 8767 t exactly say 8775 even the demons believe and don 8767 t take the sacraments! 8776 Instead, he is more focussed on orphans and widows and 8775 faith in action. 8776
This Kingdom and this salvation, which are the key words of Jesus Christ 8767 s evangelization, are available to every human being as grace and mercy. And yet at the same time each individual must gain them by force—they belong to the violent, says the Lord (Matthew 66:67 Luke 66:66), through toil and suffering, through a life lived according to the Gospel, through abnegation and the Cross, through the spirit of the beatitudes. But above all each individual gains them through a total interior renewal which the Gospel calls metanoia it is a radical conversion, a profound change of mind and heart.
. to my comment #65: I forgot to mention that part of the reason your words, 8775 I’m told that I could still be saved while inside the Roman church as long as I still beleive in sola fide, 8776 resonated with me is that, after I returned to the Catholic Church, some of my Protestant friends came to me and affirmed their belief that I was 8775 still saved. 8776
Jesus is clearly talking about the flesh that He gave for the life of the did that on the cross. Those who believe He is talking symbolically here in John 6, have a real problem when it comes to John 6:56. Did Jesus give His real flesh and blood for the life of the world, or was it only His symbolic flesh and blood?
The RSV translation uses 8775 born anew, 8776 rather than 8775 born again, 8776 but the concept is the same, as Nicodemus, bewildered, asks Jesus in the next verse:
What I do remember reading is the Book of Acts where Peter receives Cornelius and his household into the Church. Were any of Cornelius 8767 household under the age of reason? It doesn 8767 t say, either way, but they were all baptized into the Church Jesus founded. Peter made sure of that.
Popular Singles – “Holiday”, “Last Christmas”, “Come What May”, “Set the World on Fire”, “When She Cries”, “Walk on Water”
Then in Acts 65:98 says that whosoever calls out on God will be saved. That means the little old man in a remote village can be saved. Or the mother deep in China can have access to Gods saving grace too because God can be and is, everywhere. Whosoever will may come.