Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Why the objections to 'material' grace?

Expand Messages
  • praisinjc@msn.com
    From: praisinjc@m... Date: Fri Jun 1, 2001 11:57 am Subject: Re: Infant Baptism......for Don :) ...
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 1, 2001
      From: praisinjc@m...
      Date: Fri Jun 1, 2001 11:57 am
      Subject: Re: Infant Baptism......for Don :)


      --- In Churchianity@y..., John Schwery <jschwery@n...> wrote:
      <<One thing I have against the practice of infant baptism is that to
      me, it supports a works, salvation.>>

      For one thing, in the Sacraments God GIVES something.
      The Sacraments are not works..they are Gifts, free gifts.
      I think the real stumbling block for many evangelicals is that they
      object to the idea of real graces being recieved through material
      elements. However this objection is clearly thwarted throughout Holy
      Scripture.
      Did Not God become a MAN, flesh and blood, in order redeem us and
      atone for our sins? God ACCOMPLISHED our salvation through the
      necessity of the Incarnation. He HAD to take on full human nature,
      material and immaterial to save us, as Hebrews 2 points out well.
      Hence MATTER is essential to our salvation!

      Baptism and the Lords Supper are materials that the Lord gives and
      communicates graces through. Why is this so defensive really?

      Everything He made is good.
      The mud He put on the blind mans eyes prior to healing them, for
      example, Ever wonder why He did that?
      He was fully able to heal the man simply by His touch, yes?
      I believe there was a sacramental revelation hidden in that event..
      God healing and giving something by way of a material element.
      Of course, it is plain also that Gods graces are not subject only to
      the sacraments, in the same way as the Lord also healed men and women
      throughout scripture simply by His touch and without using anything
      extra.
      HOWEVER, He was incarnate and those healings most often occured
      through touch/contact..material again;)

      As i am a Christian and not a gnostic, i have no problem with
      sacramental grace, but i rather rejoice in it.

      Brett<><
    • JB LACA
      Well said, Brett! Blessings, Johnny ... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail -
      Message 2 of 2 , Jun 2, 2001
        Well said, Brett!
        Blessings,
        Johnny

        --- praisinjc@... wrote:
        > From: praisinjc@m...
        > Date: Fri Jun 1, 2001 11:57 am
        > Subject: Re: Infant Baptism......for Don :)
        >
        >
        > --- In Churchianity@y..., John Schwery
        > <jschwery@n...> wrote:
        > <<One thing I have against the practice of infant
        > baptism is that to
        > me, it supports a works, salvation.>>
        >
        > For one thing, in the Sacraments God GIVES
        > something.
        > The Sacraments are not works..they are Gifts, free
        > gifts.
        > I think the real stumbling block for many
        > evangelicals is that they
        > object to the idea of real graces being recieved
        > through material
        > elements. However this objection is clearly thwarted
        > throughout Holy
        > Scripture.
        > Did Not God become a MAN, flesh and blood, in order
        > redeem us and
        > atone for our sins? God ACCOMPLISHED our salvation
        > through the
        > necessity of the Incarnation. He HAD to take on full
        > human nature,
        > material and immaterial to save us, as Hebrews 2
        > points out well.
        > Hence MATTER is essential to our salvation!
        >
        > Baptism and the Lords Supper are materials that the
        > Lord gives and
        > communicates graces through. Why is this so
        > defensive really?
        >
        > Everything He made is good.
        > The mud He put on the blind mans eyes prior to
        > healing them, for
        > example, Ever wonder why He did that?
        > He was fully able to heal the man simply by His
        > touch, yes?
        > I believe there was a sacramental revelation hidden
        > in that event..
        > God healing and giving something by way of a
        > material element.
        > Of course, it is plain also that Gods graces are not
        > subject only to
        > the sacraments, in the same way as the Lord also
        > healed men and women
        > throughout scripture simply by His touch and without
        > using anything
        > extra.
        > HOWEVER, He was incarnate and those healings most
        > often occured
        > through touch/contact..material again;)
        >
        > As i am a Christian and not a gnostic, i have no
        > problem with
        > sacramental grace, but i rather rejoice in it.
        >
        > Brett<><
        >
        >


        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
        a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.