A question for some non-catholic,,,The Catholic Church Baptizes infants.

[Dokimas]

What’s a shower?

I love straight forward answers to straight forward questions. :extrahappy:

 

[rev_kevin]

**My **mistake. It was lack of Faith (reason #2)

wrong again. Keep trying.

 

[RockyRoad]

I think its something that gets you wet. I could be wrong, its been a while.

Oh…That’s what I got when I just stepped outside to get some fresh bananas!

 

[RockyRoad]

I love straight forward answers to straight forward questions. :extrahappy:

 

[Dokimas]

Not only do I KNOW it redeemed the world - I drink, it per his command, (John 6) at least once a week.

Putting together your two satements like you did ‘begs’ the question why then, do you, being a member of the world that was redeemed, need to take It once a week or at all?​

Before you go telling me I don’t understand, look at your statement.

 

[elvisman]

I’m trying to look at this objectively. Not agreeing on baptism is in no way indicative of understanding that Jesus paid for our sins through His blood. I hate to see these battles…but isn’t that an ad hominem type of attack? Just because someone doesn’t understand one thing as you do doesn’t mean that someone is inherently wrong about something else.

No.
An ad hominem would be an un-called for attack on his character.

I’m saying plainly that if he is so wrong on one very important aspect of the histopric Christian faith, then his position falls like a house of cards. I can’t trust him to be right regarding the faith.

That says nothing about his character. I am judging his fruits (Matt. 7:16).

 

[RockyRoad]

No.
An ad hominem would be an un-called for attack on his character.

I’m saying plainly that if he is so wrong on one very important aspect of the histopric Christian faith, then his position falls like a house of cards. I can’t trust him to be right regarding the faith.

That says nothing about his character. I am judging his fruits (Matt. 7:16).

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument toward the person” or “argument against the person”), is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.

 

[elvisman]

Putting together your two satements like you did ‘begs’ the question why then, do you, being a member of the world that was redeemed, need to take It once a week or at all?​

Before you go telling me I don’t understand, look at your statement.

Your semantic games aside - my statement was correct, although I may have added an extra comma. **
Jesus commanded us to eat his flesh and drink his Blood in John 6 - just as he commanded that we ALL be baptized in the Great Commission at the end of Matthew’s Gospel.

 

[elvisman]

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument toward the person” or “argument against the person”), is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.

Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary:

ad hominem:
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

---

I rest my case.

 

[Dokimas]

I think its something that gets you wet. I could be wrong, its been a while.

It’s been a while since you were wrong? :bigyikes:

 

[Dokimas]

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument toward the person” or “argument against the person”), is an argument which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.

Sorry you got sucked into this ‘debate’.

 

[elvisman]

Putting together your two satements like you did ‘begs’ the question why then, do you, being a member of the world that was redeemed, need to take It once a week or at all?​

Before you go telling me I don’t understand, look at your statement.

Which REALLY begs the questions:
Rather than playing sophomoric semantic games - do you know what the Blood of Christ did for us?
Hos does this relate to Baptism - which is the topic of the thread?

 

[rev_kevin]

Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary:

ad hominem:
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

---

I rest my case.

There you have it. That’s him.

 

[RockyRoad]

Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary:

ad hominem:
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

---

I rest my case.

That’s only two of the definitions.

Person 1 makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person 1  (in this case his belief about infant baptism)
Therefore claim X is false

You may rest your case…but falsely

 

[Dokimas]

Merriam-Webster’s 11th Collegiate Dictionary:

ad hominem:
1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent’s character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

---

I rest my case.

And you fit your 2nd part of the definition so I rest Rocky’s case.​

And my guess is you, from reading your posts, are prejudice against non-catholic Christians which means Rocky is correct on both parts of your definition.

 

[elvisman]

Sorry you got sucked into this ‘debate’.

Actually - a debate is when 2 or more parties submit and exchange valid arguments or opinions to prove a point.
So far between the two of us - I’m the only one who has . . .

 

[RockyRoad]

Actually - a debate is when 2 or more parties submit and exchange valid arguments or opinions to prove a point.
So far between the two of us - I’m the only one who has . . .

A legend in your own mind.

 

[Dokimas]

Actually - a debate is when 2 or more parties submit and exchange valid arguments or opinions to prove a point.
So far between the two of us - I’m the only one who has . . .

How’s your sense of humor today? I’m hoping it is good. So here goes…

I’ll bet you talk to yourself alot believing you’ll always be in a conversation that is highly intellectual.

 

[elvisman]

And you fit your 2nd part of the definition so I rest Rocky’s case.​

And my guess is you, from reading your posts, are prejudice against non-catholic Christians which means Rocky is correct on both parts of your definition.

Sorry, but your cry of “ad hominem” is merely a refuge for your ignorance on these 2 particular subjects.
**I wasn’t calling you an ignoramus - as that would have implied that you are ignorant about everything - or, most things.

 

[Dokimas]

Actually - a debate is when 2 or more parties submit and exchange valid arguments or opinions to prove a point.
So far between the two of us - I’m the only one who has . . .

Let’s take a vote: This is another ad hominem statement according to Elvis’ definition.

Yes or No.