- Status
C
CatholicsErr
Guest
All of you say this, however none of you can justify the act of infant baptism. It is not found in Scriptures, therefore you try to skip around it by saying Bible is insufficient. There is no sin in babies, they cannot repent nor believe. So what you are trying to justify, is an act which is superfluous.
“Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”(John 3:5) . “Water” here is a clear reference to baptism. You think baptism is only for entering the kingdom, which is untrue. Baptism is for the remission of our sins and also to be part of Christ’s death and resurrection(Romans 6). Without hearing, believing and repenting, is not the act of infant baptism nonsensical, just like how circumcision is useless without the circumcision of our heart(Romans 2:29).
I think the initial impulse to baptize infants was to imitate the Jews and have a ritual that would keep children in the church as they grew up. Later, a justification was sought for that practice which was already being done. “Ecclesiastical custom with regard to the administration of Baptism has undergone a change in the course of history. Whereas the early Church baptized adults only, the baptism of children soon became the usual practice” [Pastoral Medicine, pages 32-33]. What developed was a belief that sin was inherited from Adam. “Where in the fourth and fifth centuries the doctrine of original sin became better known, the practice of infant baptism progressed rapidly” [Legislation on the Sacraments in the New Code of Canon Law, page 72]. Original sin is a flawed concept which is disproved by Ezekiel 18:20.
Again, I will make myself clear, I’m no Protestant. Also, in the country I’m from there is no church which is explicitly named “Protestant Church”. Pentecostalism, Orthodox, Catholicism is prominent there, but I disagree with some of their principles and teachings too. Christ founded only one church, and that is the kingdom I belong too.
“Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”(John 3:5) . “Water” here is a clear reference to baptism. You think baptism is only for entering the kingdom, which is untrue. Baptism is for the remission of our sins and also to be part of Christ’s death and resurrection(Romans 6). Without hearing, believing and repenting, is not the act of infant baptism nonsensical, just like how circumcision is useless without the circumcision of our heart(Romans 2:29).
I think the initial impulse to baptize infants was to imitate the Jews and have a ritual that would keep children in the church as they grew up. Later, a justification was sought for that practice which was already being done. “Ecclesiastical custom with regard to the administration of Baptism has undergone a change in the course of history. Whereas the early Church baptized adults only, the baptism of children soon became the usual practice” [Pastoral Medicine, pages 32-33]. What developed was a belief that sin was inherited from Adam. “Where in the fourth and fifth centuries the doctrine of original sin became better known, the practice of infant baptism progressed rapidly” [Legislation on the Sacraments in the New Code of Canon Law, page 72]. Original sin is a flawed concept which is disproved by Ezekiel 18:20.
Again, I will make myself clear, I’m no Protestant. Also, in the country I’m from there is no church which is explicitly named “Protestant Church”. Pentecostalism, Orthodox, Catholicism is prominent there, but I disagree with some of their principles and teachings too. Christ founded only one church, and that is the kingdom I belong too.
Last edited:
A
adf417
Guest
Neither is Jesus being the second person of the Trinity and yet you have no problem with professing that. Why the double standard? And again, why are not all non-Catholics on the same page as you are @CatholicsErr? Why are you and the early reformers at odds on these issues? Seems like your battle begins elsewhere, not with Catholics.
Peace!!!
W
Wannano
Guest
As I understand it the word “trinity” describes a situation where three components make a whole singular product. I suppose it is true that the word "trinity " as a term for the Godhead is not found in the Bible. However, the concept is present in many Scriptures. Basic is that the first verse of Genesis states “in the beginning God…”. God existed before He made the world. Scripture says He sent His Son to earth, Emmanuel meaning God with us. Jesus said He and the Father are one. Jesus also promised the human race the coming of the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, who takes up residence in the hearts of men. The concept of the Trinity is found in Scripture.CatholicsErr:
Neither is Jesus being the second person of the Trinity and yet you have no problem with professing that. Why the double standard? And again, why are not all non-Catholics on the same page as you are @CatholicsErr? Why are you and the early reformers at odds on these issues? Seems like your battle begins elsewhere, not with Catholics.
Peace!!!
It is not the same though for infant baptism. If someone was totally ignorant of the Bible and read it for the first time without the influence of others, I wonder what Scripture there is that would leave that person with the conclusion that infant baptism is even an item presented in the Scripture.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
If you disagree with the teachings of Holy Mother Church, and you do, then you are a protestant.
W
Wannano
Guest
I have had Catholics numerous times say they disagree with this or that teaching but they have no choice but to tow the line. Are these Catholics then Protestants to some degree even though they are practicing Catholics?CatholicsErr:
If you disagree with the teachings of Holy Mother Church, and you do, then you are a protestant.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
When we go up to receive Holy Communion we say AMEN just before we receive it. With our AMEN, we are assenting to all the Churches teachings…every single one.
So yes, it’s ok to not like some Church teachings…but if you just flat out don’t believe what the Church teaches then you are a protestant. And there are many, MANY protestants within our ranks.
So yes, it’s ok to not like some Church teachings…but if you just flat out don’t believe what the Church teaches then you are a protestant. And there are many, MANY protestants within our ranks.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
What strikes me as very interesting is that I understand some distraught Catholics do not agree with the changes regarding the teaching that Protestants have gone from being heretics to being brothers and sisters in Christ. Ironic that they then are Protestants!
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
This is where understanding our Jewish roots helps out a lot. The apostles and first Christians were Jewish and so is the Lord and his mother. We have divine liturgy that dates back to St. James in Jerusalem. The origin of liturgical worship in general was first Jewish, of course.
When we baptize infants we are baptizing them into the covenant just as was previously done by the Jews with circumcision…
But in answer to your question, Jesus said let the little children come to me. He mentioned no age of accountability and last i checked, infants are just little children.
Everything was not written down as we know from reading the tail end of John’s gospel. Actually, quite little was written down and that’s why we need the Church. If i plug the words pornography, masturbation or heroin into a biblegateway search engine i will come up blank. Will need a Church to explain why those things are wrong since the bible does not mention them.
When we baptize infants we are baptizing them into the covenant just as was previously done by the Jews with circumcision…
But in answer to your question, Jesus said let the little children come to me. He mentioned no age of accountability and last i checked, infants are just little children.
Everything was not written down as we know from reading the tail end of John’s gospel. Actually, quite little was written down and that’s why we need the Church. If i plug the words pornography, masturbation or heroin into a biblegateway search engine i will come up blank. Will need a Church to explain why those things are wrong since the bible does not mention them.
W
Wannano
Guest
Yes, Jesus said let the children come to Him. My understanding that was in response to his disciples shooing them away. It does not mean He was proposing infant baptism, in fact, Jesus saying that could just as easily mean that unbaptized babies that died were safe with Him, not subjected to limbo or unfulfilled Heaven.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
So, separated brothers and sisters is a nicer way of saying heretic, lol. Thanks Vatican II.
I am a heretic towards your denomination because I dont agree with your doctrine.
Different levels of heresy of course. I think Islam is just full blown apostate type heresy and you folks are like family who left home, or never knew this was home to begin with.
I am a heretic towards your denomination because I dont agree with your doctrine.
Different levels of heresy of course. I think Islam is just full blown apostate type heresy and you folks are like family who left home, or never knew this was home to begin with.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
I think a lot of non-Christian people recognize that pornography and heroin are wrong without having any teaching from a church.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
Does not mean he was not, either. Insert Church for further clarification.
L
Lenten_ashes
Guest
I think rainbow type Churches which are all over the place now, tend to make up morality as they go. So which church a person is a part of makes a difference.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
I agree. €********10
P
Pattylt
Guest
What church do you attend? Are you a church of one? I believe the Bible has something to say about not gathering together for spiritual needs.
If you are a church of one, then I guess you are your own Pope, your own authority. With no method to correct errors, who knows how off the rails you will go!
W
Wannano
Guest
His profile says he is Church of Christ. Of course, he is now suspended.CatholicsErr:
What church do you attend? Are you a church of one? I believe the Bible has something to say about not gathering together for spiritual needs.
If you are a church of one, then I guess you are your own Pope, your own authority. With no method to correct errors, who knows how off the rails you will go!
Last edited:
P
Pattylt
Guest
The baptism discussion is interesting. My understanding is that, first and foremost it is to erase original sin. The parents baptizing their child are doing it on behalf of the child, taking responsibility for the child’s saving faith. Later, when the child reaches age of reason, Confirmation confirms the baptism by the child’s desire. So, in a way, it’s a two step process. Yes, the infant can not reason to the faith but the parents do so on their behalf and then the child confirms that baptism.
The Bible speaks of entire families being baptized…do they exclude infants and the young? It doesn’t say but if it’s stated as a family, I think it’s logical to assume it does. Remember, at first no one was Christian…it was, of course adults that were converted. As soon as family’s were involved the issue may have come up. That we don’t read any discussion of this kind of hints very strongly that no one was excluded. The infants had original sin…they didn’t acquire it later…so, they needed it every much as adults did!
Am I correct? If not, where did I go wrong… thanks.
The Bible speaks of entire families being baptized…do they exclude infants and the young? It doesn’t say but if it’s stated as a family, I think it’s logical to assume it does. Remember, at first no one was Christian…it was, of course adults that were converted. As soon as family’s were involved the issue may have come up. That we don’t read any discussion of this kind of hints very strongly that no one was excluded. The infants had original sin…they didn’t acquire it later…so, they needed it every much as adults did!
Am I correct? If not, where did I go wrong… thanks.
V
vsedriver
Guest
neither is it forbidden in scripture.
they have original sin. (but you probably don’t believe or understand what that is)
which is why we baptize babies
it’s both. Baptism now saves you and takes away your sins and allows you to enter into the kingdom. It’s why Paul compares it to circumcision. It’s also why circumcision was an issue with the gentiles and took a church council to settle the issue. Scripture wasn’t used to settle the issue.
However, if you want to know what Catholics believe about baptism there are ample sources available with all the buzzers and whistle linked to scripture.
could you please provide the author and date of publication so I can evaluate the quote in context?
likewise where is this book? Who is the author?
by what authority should I believe your interpretation over the interpretation of the Catholic Church which has her authority from the apostles?
where is this church? Since we disagree on baptism let us do what scripture instructs. Let us take the issue to the Church. Now tell me, where do I go?
S
steve-b
Guest
just a few thoughts,Hello Everyone,
After disbelieving in Catholicism for a while, I started to attend Mass again. The thing is, I still don’t believe. While kneeling with the rosary I calmly admit to myself “you don’t believe this is true, you just dont want to let go of the past.”
Because of my disbelief I have not gone to reconciliation and I have not recieved the Eucharist, but I ask for a blessing at communion.
I don’t want to walk away from Catholicism for good and join an other religion, but if I continue like this I know I will.
Put simply my disagreements with the faith are on two points: 1.I believe that all will be reconciled with God in the end (no eternal damnation). 2. After practicing Catholicism with genuine devotion and belief, I am no holier (I.e. Catholicism doesn’t seem to work).
We ALL are a work in progress. None of US is perfect. Meaning WE are not once and done. Otherwise why are we instructed to persevere till the end? Persevere in what? AND doesn’t persevere, suggests struggle is involved in the process…till the end … as in, till our last breath here on this side of eternity? Yes
Paul in writing his opening to the Church of Rome, made a specific point about faith. It is the obedience of faith that is important. And he closes his letter with the obedience of faith. HERE And HERE , in between, are the particulars.
As for leaving or staying,
I pass on Jesus prayer. HERE. Any division allowed there? Nope!
You see what Jesus prayed for (link above). Zero tolerance for division. Jesus changes Simon’s name to
Rock, Petros, (Peter). Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom. He was made the leader of Our Lord’s Church on earth. All then are to be united perfectly to Peter to be “in” Our Lord’s Church.
Last edited:
- Status