1. Italo made a plea that his name be removed, except if there is something I am missing, he asked kindly.
2. The OP made an observation of seeming hypocrisy, of which he was right to have noticed.
3. Italo has made submissions, where he painstakingly explained the difference in circumstances.
4. At this stage, the OP has to decide on the way foward, taking into cognizance the fact that he wants a friendly atmosphere.

*note that every other distractive/ derailing inputs were ignored by this poster*

italo:

My God!

I've not even started and you're already calling me ignorant...

YOU are just here to fight me abi...

Alright go ahead and fight me. I'm not giving YOU any answers.

After all, when Jesus was taken to Herod and saw that Herod was just being imbecilic, he didn't say a word to him. Let me imitate the master.

ok let's thread softly, no abuse, can u answer them now?

italo:

My God!

I've not even started and you're already calling me ignorant...

YOU are just here to fight me abi...

Alright go ahead and fight me. I'm not giving YOU any answers.

After all, when Jesus was taken to Herod and saw that Herod was just being imbecilic, he didn't say a word to him. Let me imitate the master.

italo italo italo we await your reply.. Forget all these. I directed this thread to you cus u seem to be in a better position to answer. Just reply my questions. Thats all we seek..

Italo is already intimidated

ukuts gp!!

woky: ukuts gp!!

what is your problem. Can't u see that ur brother is avoiding these questions. So if italo cant answer those questions nobody from catholic can answer it. It is a shame o

Ukuts gp: what is your problem. Can't u see that ur brother is avoiding these questions. So if italo cant answer those questions nobody from catholic can answer it. It is a shame o

lolz.. ^^ exactly hw satan wanted to tempt Jesus but he failed.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Udo!!

(1) why do the catholics practice infant baptism? I.e baptizing children and infants.

let me play with this, there are many ways to answer this, i could say 1st of all the bible doesn't condemn it, 2nd it doesn't differentiate btw adult and children during baptism, 3rd it was practiced in the early church from earliest times, but i'll keep those arguements for e time and explain it to you go terms of the covenant. To be continued...

OP, these questions have been asked over and over again in this Religious Section and answers have been provided over and over again by some Catholics on those threads. Why not check those threads for answers and probably make your observations on those threads.

https://www.nairaland.com/1503616/please-there-anything-like-purgatory

https://www.nairaland.com/1508216/italo-belligerent-catholic-mary-wasnt

https://www.nairaland.com/1516744/catholicism-true-christianity

https://www.nairaland.com/1464338/thread-catholics/17

ok,there is so many one time Catholic or roman catholic everywhere,plse can you tell me what made you to be one time catholic or roman catholic?

woky: lolz.. ^^ exactly hw satan wanted to tempt Jesus but he failed.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Udo!!

u see urself? Answer the question and stop playing pranks

It is really a shame that Italo ever did asked that his name be removed from the OP of this thread when he did not see anthing wrong in calling Jman05 out.

Mrlouis: young man.. After creating this thread,. I stumbled on one which you created
https://www.nairaland.com/1506699/jman05-please-defend-jehovahs-witnesses

so pls dnt be a hypocrite bro and answer my questions accordingly. And no diversions. Am waiting.

Thank you.

Well, honesty of heart is a scarce commodity in this world.

Smh for him.

Ukuts gp: u see urself? Answer the question and stop playing pranks

i no dy answer!!

loveroftruth: It is really a shame that Italo ever did asked that his name be removed from the OP of this thread when he did not see anthing wrong in calling Jman05 out.

Well, honesty of heart is a scarce commodity in this world.

Smh for him.

And you didn't see italo's reply before writing this?
Whereas Jmans asked him to create that thread, italo never asked for this one.

Beside there is a difference between saying Jmans defend jw doctrines and
Italo. Catholics defend your doctrines.

loveroftruth: It is really a shame that Italo ever did asked that his name be removed from the OP of this thread when he did not see anthing wrong in calling Jman05 out.



Well, honesty of heart is a scarce commodity in this world.

Smh for him.

so you did nt see Italo's reply b4 writing this
.
.
.
.
.

Nothing in this world that is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. Smh for u

obadiah777: that nigga italo is the least humble member of nairaland

Are u liken this man to Italo or what do u mean?

Mrlouis: italo italo italo we await your reply.. Forget all these. I directed this thread to you cus u seem to be in a better position to answer. Just reply my questions. Thats all we seek..

Ukuts gp: Italo is already intimidated

Ukuts gp: what is your problem. Can't u see that ur brother is avoiding these questions. So if italo cant answer those questions nobody from catholic can answer it. It is a shame o

If after reading my first 3 posts on this thread, you still decide not to understand what I'm saying, there is every chance that you will decide not to understand whatever I have to say about the Catholic faith.

However, I continue to appeal to the OP, please save from this discomfort by removing my name from the title.

God bless you as you do so.

loveroftruth: It is really a shame that Italo ever did asked that his name be removed from the OP of this thread when he did not see anthing wrong in calling Jman05 out.



Well, honesty of heart is a scarce commodity in this world.

Smh for him.

Is it that you didnt read my explanation for that or you just have something bad to say about me since I'm Catholic?

italo:

If after reading my first 3 posts on this thread, you still decide not to understand what I'm saying, there is every chance that you will decide not to understand whatever I have to say about the Catholic faith.

However, I continue to appeal to the OP, please save from this discomfort by removing my name from the title.

God bless you as you do so.

so if the Op dnt remove ur name, u cant answer the question? Did the name there hv any effect on you? U are funny sha.

Ukuts gp: so if the Op dnt remove ur name, u cant answer the question? Did the name there hv any effect on you? U are funny sha.

u jst wnt him to answer so dat u wil start displaying ur ignorance abi...hmmm

adsonstone:

Following this thread.

I have similar questions too (not any form of critic though)....just to be clear about some things you do.

Regarding the thread title;
Are you not proud of being a catholic?
However, if you want it removed, I urge the op to pls, do so.

Why should his name be removed? didnt he insert my own name in a thread he opened?

@op

You should have known that some of their teachings are not bible based, they are just traditional teaching, some of which contradict the bible.

If you want to follow only the bible, then you aren't talking Catholic.

Sal C: And you didn't see italo's reply before writing this?
Whereas Jmans asked him to create that thread, italo never asked for this one.

Beside there is a difference between saying Jmans defend jw doctrines and
Italo. Catholics defend your doctrines.

No. I didnt ask him to create a thread. I just told him to feel free to criticise any of our current teaching he feels is against the bible. Even though he derailed and start talking about a changed teaching, I never gave up in reminding him my earlier request, and even replied some unsupported inputs. If you know what you believe, thread name is no problem. at least the name is not that bad.

His inputing Italo's name should even be a privilege. at least among many other catholics, he is recognized. maybe the guy who opened it know Italo as a champion of catholic doctrine here. So he wants to direct it to him straight.

italo:

Is it that you didnt read my explanation for that or you just have something bad to say about me since I'm Catholic?

If you refuse reponding because of name, then you must be joking. what is too bad about it.

May d blind remain blind. The 'Truth' stands till the end of time and the gates of hell shall never prevail against it.

sylve11:



Are u liken this man to Italo or what do u mean?

italo may just be worse than that man lol

Na wa 4 sm xtians sha

JMAN05:

No. I didnt ask him to create a thread. I just told him to feel free to criticise any of our current teaching he feels is against the bible. Even though he derailed and start talking about a changed teaching, I never gave up in reminding him my earlier request, and even replied some unsupported inputs. If you know what you believe, thread name is no problem. at least the name is not that bad.

His inputing Italo's name should even be a privilege. at least among many other catholics, he is recognized. maybe the guy who opened it know Italo as a champion of catholic doctrine here. So he wants to direct it to him straight.

You just affirmed that he opened the thread based on a mutual understanding, unlike this one. Even from this post, you never objected to your name on the thread. If you had, he may have removed it. Let your fruit declare you a christian, just what is important about having his name on that thread. It matters not your differences, you have to judge fairly at all times. It may not be entirely wrong to draw his particular attention to the thread, but he is already here, and he has found it uncomfortable, if what you seek is his contribution, then his name should go.

Italo pls kindly ignore this thread.

JMAN05:

No. I didnt ask him to create a thread. I just told him to feel free to criticise any of our current teaching he feels is against the bible.

Here are screenshots of part of the conversation that led to my opening that thread.

Now somebody sensible, please take a look at my third post on page 1 and tell me who's telling a lie.

(The 2nd pic is the continuation of the first)

Not sure what the op’s on about. I mean, Catholics don’t deny “tradition”. These doctrines are said to be based, not directly on verses, but on PRINCIPLES found in the Bible. All Christian denominations do this. Let’s illustrate with the first issue raised, infant baptism:

Principles backing infant baptism can easily be located in both the Old and New Testaments. In the OT we saw the Israelites taking their babies to the tabernacle for blessings. In the NT, Jesus himself was, as a baby, taken to the temple (Luke 1) – that was where he encountered Simeon… and Anna, I think. Besides, there is no Bible principle – not one – that is against infant baptism. The idea of infant baptism is obviously to consecrate the child to God at birth and subsequently raise him or her in the ways of God - as seen fit by Catholics.

And how can you seriously purport to biblically question celibacy since it’s a vocation entered into voluntary with precedents in the Bible? Maybe when you’re done questioning the life and writings of St Paul. Three of the remaining four points raised are similarly non-issues which can be dismissed without stopping for breath.

Every Christian denomination is led and dictated to by a man or a group of men. Now, that’s how human institutions function and it would be too much to expect religious movements to be different. Where the men at the top, particularly the pioneers, are cultured and broad-minded we usually have a humane movement that is in some ways progressive and beneficial. Where they are ill-educated and reactionary, we have a commune that is mostly intellectually sterile and with anti-human doctrines.

*Edited*

Ubenedictus: let me play with this, there are many ways to answer this, i could say 1st of all the bible doesn't condemn it, 2nd it doesn't differentiate btw adult and children during baptism, 3rd it was practiced in the early church from earliest times, but i'll keep those arguements for d time and explain it to you go terms of the covenant. To be continued...

d bible is a record of God's covenant with his people, (u are free to disagree). For 2000yrs frm abraham to christ God has clearly shown his people that he wants their babies in covenant with him, he did this by giving d babies e covenantal sign i.e circumcision. In the new t christ changed d sign of entering into d covenant to baptism, but NOWHERE do we see christ announcing that frm now on no more babies in the covenant, instead he practically said the opposite he said 'let d children come to me do not hinder then; for such belongs the kingdom of heaven' mt 19,14. The apostles also imitated him when they called everyone and the children to enter the new covenant 'repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus christ 4 d 4giveness of sins and you shall receive the gift me the holy spirit. For this promise is to you AND TO YOUR CHILDREN' acts 2, 38 nd 39. In other words God still wanted children in covenant with him, and since baptism is d sign of entering e new covenant, y should d e babies of believers not be baptized? No wonder d bible records dat e apostles baptized households and never once said 'adults alone'. No wonder infant baptism has been in the church since earliest times.