Absolutely.  Water baptism is only meant for those who have repented (Acts.2:38-41)

[list]
[li]Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call. And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. - Acts 2:38-41[/li]
[/list]

Calling Lady, we need you to respond to our query about baptism! We need your support on this teaching. Incidentally, why does the Catholic organization baptize babies, when they have no idea of right and wrong? Babies can't repent can they?

i wish you best of luck you can continue professing your faith without being baptised from now till the end of the world.in the next world we will find out who is right

@ Chuck

i wish you best of luck you can continue professing your faith without being baptised from now till the end of the world.in the next world we will find out who is right

I think you need to re-read what was said about baptism again in this thread. Did you read anywhere where it was suggested by me, or anyone else who contributed to this section, that persons shouldn't be baptized?

You aught to be more careful Chuk.

The Bible says that no one comes to God except through Jesus Christ, the only son of God. 

So, there's no way Catholic tradition would be above the word of God.

If you like believe in Jesus Christ and believe the words of God and if you don't like, believe in your Catholic teachings.  On the judgement day only true believers would be saved.  If Mary went to heaven without death and the only son of God, Jesus Christ died and rose again on the third day,  I wonder and I am so sorry for the Catholic church and the many souls it seems to me they are decieving with that kind of teaching.

Because, Mary's death was not recorded in the Bible should not lead us to assume or conclude that Mary escaped death and went straight to heaven. 

Also, many incidents or events that happened during Jesus Ministery/time were not recorded nor mentioned in the Bible e.g. the passing of Joseph, Mary's husband was not recorded in the Bible and, does it mean that he too escaped death and went straight to heaven? At the wedding ceremony in Cana where Christ turned water into wine because the wedding guests ran out of wine and his mother - Mary suggested he do something , Joseph his father was absent and was not mentioned rather Mary and Jesus disciples (John 2:1-11).  What does this suggest to you? Still, his absence in Jesus other crusades was never confirmed to us.  This does not mean he did not die nor went straight to heaven.    Yes the Bible is the word of God however, not every detail of the words that came out of God's mouth that the Bible recorders were able to capture or documented at the time.  We are all humans and we forget things.   For example, have you taken lectures in a lecture hall before? Is it every word that came out of the lecturer's mouth that you are able to jot down? You jot down what you consider essential and necessary probably that's what happened and, the Bible recorders at the time may not have considered certain events very important. Therefore if you listen to or follow your Catholic teachings without believing in Jesus Christ, confessing your sins, truely repenting and be Born Again - you will miss HEAVEN and, hell you dare not think of. 

God bless you!

Another doctrine that is not bible-based that has become a Roman Catholic doctrine is the one that says that Mary mother of Jesus remained a virgin [quote][/quote] Bobbyaf

Well Bobbyaf, if that's truely the Catholic church doctrine - it's a lie because Mary and Joseph had six other children after Christ (four boys and two girls) in total they had seven children.  So, Jesus had 4 brthers and two sisters conceived and born by Mary and Joseph.  The Bible named them as: James, Joseph, Simon and Judas but the names of his sisters were not mentioned (Matthew 13 v.55 - 56). They were Jesus half-brothers. So I suggest every Catholic get a Bible and read it yourselves or join other churches that truely teaches the word of God. As you can see Christ came from a large family and a poor one for that matter.  His mother was a house-wife and his father a carpenter.  He had no Flash cars (as preachers of today do) and wore no designer cloths neither his brothers.  Today, most preachers are doing the opposite.  Some, not only have Flash cars a luxury lifestyle - Flasy homes in every city of this world , their wives and relatives too.   I leave it to them to justify.  We will all be answerable one day.  It is true that God does not want us to be poor but there's a difference between poverty and wealth/luxury.  I rest my case.

[/quote]Well the authority comes from God, even the Bible will tell you that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth, the Bible calls the Church (not the Bible) the foundation and pillar of truth.

1 Timothy 3:15
15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth

I hope you actually know what the traditions of the Church is before you start speaking false things.[quote]

Lady

You see, lady - you do not seem to understand what the Bible is teaching here when it says 'the Church is the pillar, ', The Bible meant Jesus Christ is the pillar and foundation of truth, ok!  That's what is meant here and not ordinary Church building or worshippers in it as you saw it.  The Church is Christ foundation,  Without Christ there is no Church, ok! Take your Bible to pastors who can interprete it very well for you as I can see you don't seem to understand it fully.

Welcome Theblessed

Seeing we are dealing with the teaching of baptism, what is your position on infant baptism? What do you think about sprinkling as utilized by the priests as a mode of baptism?

For our friend Lady who is always asking for quotes and evidence here are a few quotes from your own literature.

"For the Roman pontiff (pope), by reason of his office as VICAR OF CHRIST, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal POWER over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise UNHINDERED." -CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, 1994, P. 254 #882
Notice what the pope is called, "Roman pontiff"

"All sects of heretics are condemned and various punishments are appointed for them and their accomplices." --Pope Alexander IV, --p. 135

Brothers and sisters in Christ I want you to note the evil and deception, and the degree of cruelty that prevailed then. Here is a historical piece of interest

In 1809, Colonel Lehmanowsky was attached to that part of Napoleon's army stationed at Madrid; and while in that city, the Colonel used to express his opinions freely among the people, respecting the priests and Jesuits of the Inquisition. It had been decreed by the French emperor that the Inquisition and monasteries should be suppressed, but the decree was not executed. Months had passed away, and the prisons of the Inquisition had not been opened. One night, about twelve o'clock, as the Colonel was walking along one of the streets of Madrid, two armed men sprang upon him from an alley, and made a furious attack. He instantly drew his sword, put himself in a posture of defence, and, while struggling with them, he saw at a distance the lights of the patroles--French soldiers mounted, who carried lanterns, and rode through the streets of the city at all hours of the night, to preserve order. He called to them in French, and, as they hastened to his assistance, the assailants took to their heels, and escaped--not, however, before he saw by their dress that they belonged to the guards of the Inquisition.

He went immediately to Marshal Soult, then governor of Madrid, told him what had taken place, and reminded him of the decree to suppress the institution. Marshal Soult replied that he might go and destroy it. The Colonel having told him that his regiment--the 9th of the Polish Lancers--was not sufficient for such a service, without the aid of two additional regiments, the troops required were granted: one of these regiments was the 17th, under the command of Colonel de Lile, subsequently pastor of an evangelical church in Marseilles. The troops marched to fulfil their destined object, the Inquisition being about five miles from the city. It was surrounded by a wall of great strength, and defended by a company of soldiers.

When they arrived at the walls, the Colonel addressed one of the sentinels, and summoned the holy fathers to surrender to the imperial army, and open the gates of the Inquisition. The sentinel who was standing on the wall appeared to enter into conversation for a moment with some one within, at the close of which he presented his musket, and shot one of the Colonel's men. This was a signal of attack, and he ordered his troops to fire upon those that appeared on the walls.

It was soon obvious that it was an unequal warfare. The walls of the Inquisition were covered with soldiers of the holy office; there was also a breastwork upon the walls, behind which they partially exposed themselves as they discharged their muskets. The French troops were in the open plain, and exposed to a destructive fire. They had no cannon, nor could they scale the walls; and the gates successfully resisted all attempts at forcing them. The Colonel could not retire, and send for cannon to break through the walls, without giving them time to lay a train for blowing up the French troops. He saw, therefore, that it was necessary to change the mode of attack, and directed that some trees should be cut down and trimmed, to be used as battering-rams. Two of these were taken up by detachments of men, as numerous as could work to advantage, and brought to bear upon the walls with all the power that they could exert; while the troops kept up a fire to protect them from that poured upon them from the walls. Presently the walls began to tremble, a breach was made, and the imperial troops rushed into the Inquisition.

Here they met with an incident, to which nothing but Jesuitical effrontery is equal. The inquisitor-general, followed by the father-confessors in their priestly robes, all came out of their rooms as the French were making their way into the interior of the Inquisition; and with long faces and their arms crossed over their breasts, their fingers resting on their shoulders, as though they had been deaf to all the noise of the attack and defence, and had just learned what was going on, they addressed themselves in the language of seeming rebuke to their own soldiers, and asked, "Why do you fight our friends the French?"

Their intention was, doubtless, to make us think that the resistance was wholly unauthorized by them; and if they could have succeeded in making a temporary impression in their favour, they would have had an opportunity, in the confusion of the moment, to escape. But their artifice was too shallow, and did not succeed. Colonel Lehmanowsky caused them to be placed under guard, and all the soldiers of the Inquisition to be secured as prisoners. He then proceeded to examine all the rooms of the stately edifice. He passed from room to room, and found all perfectly in order. The apartments were richly furnished, with altars and crucifixes and wax candles in abundance, but no evidence could be discovered of iniquity being practised there; there were none of those peculiar features which might have been expected in an Inquisition. Splendid paintings adorned the walls. There was a rich and extensive library. Beauty and splendour appeared everywhere, and the most perfect order on which eyes ever rested. The architecture, the proportions were perfect. The ceiling and floors of wood were scoured and highly polished. The marble floors were arranged with a strict regard to order.

There was everything to please the eye and gratify a cultivated taste; but where were those horrid instruments of torture which were reported to be there, and where those dungeons in which human beings were said to be buried alive? The search seemed to be in vain. The holy fathers assured the Colonel that they had been belied, and that he had seen all. The commanding officer began to think that this Inquisition was different from others of which he had heard, and was inclined to give up the search.

But Colonel de Lile was of a different mind. Addressing Colonel Lehmanowsky, he said, "Colonel, you are commander to-day, and as you say so it must be; but if you will be advised by me, let this marble floor be examined. Let water be brought and poured upon it, and we will watch and see if there is any place through which it passes more freely than others." "Do as you please, Colonel," replied the commander, and ordered water to be brought accordingly. The slabs of marble were large, and beautifully polished. When the water had been poured over the floor, much to the dissatisfaction of the inquisitors, a careful examination was made of every seam in the floor, to see if the water passed through. Presently Colonel de Lile exclaimed that he had found it. By the side of one of these marble slabs the water passed through fast, as though there was an opening beneath. All hands were now at work for further discovery; the officers with their swords, and the soldiers with their bayonets, cleared out the seam, and endeavoured to raise the slab; others with the but-ends of their muskets struck the slab with all their might in order to break it; while the priests remonstrated against the desecration of their holy and beautiful house. While this engaged, a soldier who was striking with the but-end of his musket struck a spring, and the marble slab flew up. The faces of the inquisitors instantly grew pale as Belshazzar when the hand-writing appeared on the wall, and they shook with fear from head to foot. Beneath the marble slab, now partly up, there was a staircase. The commander stepped to the altar, and took from the candlestick one of the lighted candles four feet in length, that he might explore the room below. One of the inquisitors endeavoured to prevent him; and laying his hand gently on his arm, with a very demure and sanctified look, he said, "My son, you must not take those lights with your bloody hands: they are holy." "Never mind," said the commander, "I will take a holy thing to shed light on iniquity; I will bear the responsibility!" Colonel Lehmanowsky then took the light, and proceeded down the staircase. When he and his companions in arms reached the floor of the stairs, they entered a large square room which was called the Hall of Judgment. In the center of it was a large block, and a chain fastened to it. On this they had been accustomed to place the accused, chained to his seat. On one side of the room was an elevated seat, called the Throne of Judgment, which the inquisitor-general occupied; and on either side were seats less elevated, for the holy fathers when engaged in the solemn business of the Holy Inquisition.

From this room they proceeded to the right, and obtained access to small cells extending the entire length of the edifice; and here they were presented with the most distressing sights.

These cells were places of solitary confinement, where the wretched objects of inquisitorial hate were confined year after year, till death released them from their sufferings: and there their bodies were suffered to remain until they were entirely decayed, and the rooms had become fit for others to occupy. To prevent this being offensive to those who occupied the Inquisition, there were flues or tubes extending to the open air, sufficiently capacious to carry off the odour. In these cells were the remains of some who had paid the debt of nature; of whom some had been dead apparently but a short time; while of others nothing remained but their bones, still chained to the floor of their dungeon.

In other cells they found living sufferers of both sexes and of every age, from threescore years and ten down to fourteen or fifteen years, all in a state of complete nudity, and all in chains! Here were old men and aged women, who had been shut up for many years. Here, too, were the middle-aged, and the young man, and the maiden of fourteen years old. The soldiers immediately went to work to release these captives from their chains, and took from their knapsacks their overcoats and other clothing, which they gave to cover their unclothedness. They were exceedingly anxious to bring them out to the light of day; but Colonel Lehmanowsky, aware of the danger, had food given them, and then brought them gradually to the light as they were able to bear it.

The soldiers then proceeded to explore yet another room on their left. Here they found the instruments of torture, of every kind which the ingenuity of men or devils could invent.

The first instrument noticed was a machine by which the victim was confined, and then, beginning with the fingers, all the joints in the hands, arms, and body were broken and drawn one after another, until the suffered died.

The second was a box in which the head and neck of the victim were so closely confined by a screw, that he could not move in any way. Over the box was a vessel, from which one drop of water fell upon the head of the victim every second, each successive drop falling upon precisely the same place; by which, in a few moments, the circulation was suspended, and the sufferer had to endure the most excruciating agony.

The third was an infernal machine, laid horizontally, to which the victim was bound; the machine then being placed between two beams, in which were scores of knives so fixed that, by turning the machine with a crank, the flesh of the sufferer was all torn from his limbs into small pieces.

ironvirginThe fourth surpassed the others in fiendish ingenuity. Its exterior was a large doll, richly dressed, and having the appearance of a beautiful woman, with her arms extended ready to embrace her victim. A semicircle was drawn around her, and the person who passed over this fatal mark touched a spring which caused the diabolical engine to open; its arms immediately clasped him, and a thousand knives cut him in as many pieces, while in the deadly embrace.

Colonel L. said that the sight of these engines of infernal cruelty kindled the fire of indignation in the bosoms of the soldiers. They declared that every Inquisitor and soldier of the inquisition should be put to the torture. Their rage was ungovernable. Colonel Lehmanowsky did not oppose them: they might have turned their arms against him, if he had attempted to arrest their work. They then began punishing the holy fathers. The first was put to death in the machine for breaking joints. The torture of the inquisitor that suffered death by the dropping of water on his head was most excruciating: the poor wretch cried out in agony to be taken from the fatal machine. Next the inquisitor-general was brought before the infernal engine called "the Virgin." He was ordered to embrace her, and begged hard to be excused. "No," said the soldiers; "you have caused others to kiss her, and now you must do it." They interlocked their bayonets, so as to form large forks, and with these pushed him over the deadly circle. The beautiful image, prepared for the embrace, instantly clasped him in its arms, and cut him into innumerable pieces. The French commander, after having witnessed the torture of four of the barbarous inquisitors, sickened at the awful scene, and he left the soldiers to wreak their vengeance on the other guilty inmates of that prison-house of hell.

Bobbyaf:

For our friend Lady who is always asking for quotes and evidence here are a few quotes from your own literature.

"For the Roman pontiff (pope), by reason of his office as VICAR OF CHRIST, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal POWER over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise UNHINDERED." -CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, 1994, P. 254 #882
Notice what the pope is called, "Roman pontiff"

now bobbyaf, weldone you have finally (i hope ) managed to present cases rationally. the above is fully correct, 100% for you.

Bobbyaf:


"All sects of heretics are condemned and various punishments are appointed for them and their accomplices." --Pope Alexander IV, --p. 135

but almost immediately (deceitfully ) you seem to lose the skill. where is the above from?
"pope alexander IV, --p 135" doesn't make any sense (except if pope alexander IV is a document ).

in case you are confused, you can compare with the first (excellent reference), CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, 1994, P. 254 #882
i will take the pain to explain a little (just in case our most learned bible thumper, bobbyaf had the misfortune of
dozing in class when this was taught):
this means a document named "catechism of the catholic church", published in 1994 (edition), page 254, article 882.

any lady, bobby and olaadegbo can find it.

bobbyaf,
you'd notice that i didn't bother with the rest of your (lenghty) post cos for the same reason above,
it lacked authenticity (to say the least ).

Both the Catholic faith and the Bible are dangerous

Best to forget both

@ Carlosein

bobbyaf,
you'd notice that i didn't bother with the rest of your (lenghty) post cos for the same reason above,
it lacked authenticity (to say the least Cool).

When you're qualified enough to put out a book with historical facts as was brought out in the above story, then you can argue about sources. If the pope who is the present head of the organization apologized for such acts of barbarism, then who are you to deny anything under the disguise of being concerned about sources.

Bobbyaf:

@ Carlosein

When you're qualified enough to put out a book with historical facts as was brought out in the above story, then you can argue about sources. If the pope who is the present head of the organization apologized for such acts of barbarism, then who are you to deny anything under the disguise of being concerned about sources.

i can not believe you actually typed this.
lady has pointed out all along that a lot of what you guys posted are spurious and made up with no actual sources in catholicism. when you tried your hands on truth from the catholic church, we all saw the source you posted.
when otherwise, i asked for a source and you (dare) to claim that i am not qualified

see what happens when we all begin to (gullibly) reason like you bobbyaf:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-231719.0.html

@lady,

the following below should give a very good explanation for why Jesus asked us to retain sins:

Luke 17:3(KJV)
(3) Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.

The above verse gives the condition for forgiving sin; and that is repentance!
So,it is safe to conclude that without repentance, there is no forgiveness of sin but a retention.
It's just like our case with God. God is willing to forgive us our sins but requires us to repent to get the forgiveness.
Also, Christ died for the sins of mankind, but the forgiveness of sins provided by his sacrifice is not available unless mankind first repents.

The point in the above verse is much clearer in the CEV bible:

Luke 17:3(CEV)
(3) So be careful what you do. Correct any followers of mine who sin, and forgive the ones who say they are sorry.

We can see that it is those who are sorry/repentant that get forgiveness.

The point being driven here is very evident through careful reading of 1 Corinthians 5 and 2 Corinthians 2. The two chapters are talking about an issue of sin(1 Corinthians 5) and forgiveness(2 Corinthians 2) concerning a particular person.

A repentant person gets forgiveness; an unrepentant person does not get forgiveness but has his sins retained.

So, when a person sins, we as Christians have the right to withold forgiveness(not with any form of malice but a clear indication of knowledge of the sin) if the person has not repented. But if he repents, forgiveness is willingly and cheerfully given.

1) Ok let's look at the context in which Christ was giving his apostles the power to forgive. Christ breathes on them and tells them "AS THE FATHER SENDS ME SO I SEND YOU" Christ tells us that he has the power to forgive sins, the Jews were surprised at this because they knew that only God can forgive sins, so the forgiving us sins by Christ is different from the forgiving of sins by man. The forgiving of sins you speak of is that which doesn't include the divine forgiving of sins by God, but the one which Christ is speaking of is the divine forgiving of sins, as in a person's sins are washed away in the sight of God, this also ties to Christ giving his apostles the power to bind and loose, they're the only ones who have this power (we'll talk about that later). So when the Priests forgives they so as Christ forgives, because Christ commissioned them as the Father commissioned Christ. The forgiving in this verse is different from the forgiving you are speaking of.

Also let's look at 2 Corinthians 2:10
This particular verse actually is in support of the Catholic view of forgiveness, because here Paul himself forgives in the person of Christ.

10 And to whom you have pardoned any thing, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ.

The offense wasn't done to Paul and yet he does the forgiving here and not only does he do it, he does it in the person of Christ, he is standing as Christ in this situatuion, so you see there is evidence in the Bible that the apostles forgive sins as Christ.

So actually in light of 2 Corinthians the interpretation of the Church is correct.

Don't forget when Christ gave the power to his apostles, he sent them in his person, they are to do just as he does, and with his power.

@ ttalks

Exactly correct! If a person fails to repent when he or she hears the saving gospel of Jesus Christ, which incidentally is the keys that Jesus refers to, there remains no forgiveness of sins. Such sins are retained both on earth as well as in heaven

then in that case we all have the power to forgive sins as God does.

My question is this, what if a person repented with Godly sorrow, and truly felt remorse for past sins, and was making preparations to get baptized, but died unexpectedly, are we to believe based on catholic doctrines, that such a person cannot be sealed? The bible makes it unequivocally clear, that the first step to being sealed occurs when we believe the gospel under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

You must have also missed the part in the Catholic doctrine where it says that those who are preparing for the Sacrament of Baptism but die abruptly without it are also saved because of their intentions.

Seriously before you post and show your ignorance why don't you make sure you've convered every part of your point first to make sure that it cannot be opposed credibly.

But for those who refused to get baptised because they think they don't need it, they won't be saved.

Jesus used water in a figurative sense of Salvation. Such as was used in John 4:14 and Isa.12:3;


But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. - John 4:14


Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation. - Isaiah 12:3

It was also used of cleansing by the Word of God in John 15:3 and Eph.5:26.


Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. - John 15:3
That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, - Ephesians 5:26

Since men are cleansed and born again by the Word of God as in James 1:18 and 1Peter 1:13


Of His own will begat He us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures. - James 1:18


Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. - 1 Peter 1:23

Therefore, we can safely conclude that being born of water as spoken by Jesus to Nicodemus meant being born again by the Word of God and not by water baptism. QED

So when John the Baptist was baptizing with water, he was doing it for the fun of it? ANd when Jesus permitted John to baptise him with water, he was playing around and just wanted to wash himself?

When the apostles baptised households with water they were just messing around too?

Calling Lady, we need you to respond to our query about baptism! We need your support on this teaching. Incidentally, why does the Catholic organization baptize babies, when they have no idea of right and wrong? Babies can't repent can they?

Did you not read in Acts of the apostles that the people wer baptised with their wholo household?

John 3:22 after speaking of baptism to Nicodemus, St. John tells us that Jesus and his disciples went into Judea, baptising them.

Acts 8:36 – the eunuch recognizes the necessity of water for his baptism. Water and baptism are never separated in the Scriptures

Acts 10:47 - Peter says "can anyone forbid water for baptizing these people, ?" The Bible always links water and baptism

Acts 22:16 – Ananias tells Saul, “arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins.” The “washing away” refers to water baptism

Acts 2:38 - Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

Matt. 28:19-20 - Jesus commands the apostles to baptize all people "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

Mark 16:16 - Jesus said "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." Jesus says believing is not enough. Baptism is also required. This is because baptism is salvific, not just symbolic

Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 - these texts show the circumcision of eight-day old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant - Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults

Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?

Matt 19:14 - Jesus clearly says the kingdom of heaven also belongs to children. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

Mark 10:14 - Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. Jesus says nothing about being too young to come into the kingdom of God.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus says to the crowd, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with "He who does not believe will be condemned." This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer. This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a "believer's baptism."

Luke 18:15 – Jesus says, “Let the children come to me.” The people brought infants to Jesus that he might touch them. This demonstrates that the receipt of grace is not dependent upon the age of reason.

Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized, " Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants

Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults

Acts 10:47-48 - Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius, which generally included infants and young children. There is not one word in Scripture about baptism being limited to adults

Acts 16:15 - Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word "household" comes from the Greek word "oikos" which is a household that includes infants and children
further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia's faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents' faith, not the children's faith

I am beginning to think you guys are doing this for sport. You completely forget the Bible that you claim to read. Anyway I have to run, have a test in 6 mins, bye

So, there's no way Catholic tradition would be above the word of God.

The Word of God IS Catholic tradition

If you like believe in Jesus Christ and believe the words of God and if you don't like, believe in your Catholic teachings.  On the judgement day only true believers would be saved.  If Mary went to heaven without death and the only son of God, Jesus Christ died and rose again on the third day,  I wonder and I am so sorry for the Catholic church and the many souls it seems to me they are decieving with that kind of teaching.

Yeah I feel sorry for those who believe that Mary went to heaven without death.

Because, Mary's death was not recorded in the Bible should not lead us to assume or conclude that Mary escaped death and went straight to heaven.

Gee those people who believe that Mary skipped death, sure need to check their Bible again.

Go and learn what the Church teaches before you post o. You will end up posting rubbish, confusing yourself and everybody.

Also, many incidents or events that happened during Jesus Ministery/time were not recorded nor mentioned in the Bible e.g. the passing of Joseph, Mary's husband was not recorded in the Bible and, does it mean that he too escaped death and went straight to heaven? At the wedding ceremony in Cana where Christ turned water into wine because the wedding guests ran out of wine and his mother - Mary suggested he do something , Joseph his father was absent and was not mentioned rather Mary and Jesus disciples (John 2:1-11). What does this suggest to you? Still, his absence in Jesus other crusades was never confirmed to us. This does not mean he did not die nor went straight to heaven. Yes the Bible is the word of God however, not every detail of the words that came out of God's mouth that the Bible recorders were able to capture or documented at the time. We are all humans and we forget things. For example, have you taken lectures in a lecture hall before? Is it every word that came out of the lecturer's mouth that you are able to jot down? You jot down what you consider essential and necessary probably that's what happened and, the Bible recorders at the time may not have considered certain events very important. Therefore if you listen to or follow your Catholic teachings without believing in Jesus Christ, confessing your sins, truely repenting and be Born Again - you will miss HEAVEN and, hell you dare not think of.

God bless you!

I know I said this before, but I will say it again. GO AND FIND OUT WHAT YOU'RE FIGHTING AGAINST FIRST BEFORE YOU FIGHT O.

Well Bobbyaf, if that's truely the Catholic church doctrine - it's a lie because Mary and Joseph had six other children after Christ (four boys and two girls) in total they had seven children. So, Jesus had 4 brthers and two sisters conceived and born by Mary and Joseph. The Bible named them as: James, Joseph, Simon and Judas but the names of his sisters were not mentioned (Matthew 13 v.55 - 56). They were Jesus half-brothers. So I suggest every Catholic get a Bible and read it yourselves or join other churches that truely teaches the word of God. As you can see Christ came from a large family and a poor one for that matter. His mother was a house-wife and his father a carpenter. He had no Flash cars (as preachers of today do) and wore no designer cloths neither his brothers. Today, most preachers are doing the opposite. Some, not only have Flash cars a luxury lifestyle - Flasy homes in every city of this world , their wives and relatives too. I leave it to them to justify. We will all be answerable one day. It is true that God does not want us to be poor but there's a difference between poverty and wealth/luxury. I rest my case.

I bet I can show you that those weren't the brothers and sisters of Jesus.
You also mentioned that they were Jesus' half siblings. Did it ever occur to you that Joseph had children before he married Mary, and that those could be his children and still leaving Mary as an ever virgin as she truly is?

Why can't you people think and read and try to understand the Bible.

You see, lady - you do not seem to understand what the Bible is teaching here when it says 'the Church is the pillar, ', The Bible meant Jesus Christ is the pillar and foundation of truth, ok! That's what is meant here and not ordinary Church building or worshippers in it as you saw it. The Church is Christ foundation, Without Christ there is no Church, ok! Take your Bible to pastors who can interprete it very well for you as I can see you don't seem to understand it fully.

I see english lessons are in order here.

15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The above verse is talking about a Church and is describing the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth. it talks about the house of God, and it tells us that the house of God is the Church of the living God, and then it goes on to describe it as the pillar and foundation of truth. This whole verse is about the Church ok.

But let's use your interpretation, since to you this verse is talking about Jesus as the pillar and foundation, then St. Paul must be telling us how to behave in Jesus Christ.
Infact let's insert your interpretation here.

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the Jesus Christ, which is the Jesus Christ of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.

So tell me how do you behave yourself in the Jesus Christ of the living God?


but this isn't the only verse that talks about the church in that way.

"All sects of heretics are condemned and various punishments are appointed for them and their accomplices." --Pope Alexander IV, --p. 135

Brothers and sisters in Christ I want you to note the evil and deception, and the degree of cruelty that prevailed then. Here is a historical piece of interest

You see you did good when you cited the catechism as your source in the posts above this one, but here you derail as a bad scholar where you post a historical fact without facts or citations. Show us where you got it from. Thanks.

Watch a former Catholic priest sharing his testimony on how the Lord opened his eyes to the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ showing now on a live broadcast on Genesis TV channel Sky 585, 592 or online if you can:
http://www.revelationtv.com/watchgen.php

His name is Richard Bennett and you can read his testimony on his website: www.bereanbeacon.org

OLAADEGBU:

Watch a former Catholic priest sharing his testimony on how the Lord opened his eyes to the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ showing now on a live broadcast on Genesis TV channel Sky 592 or online if you can:
http://www.revelationtv.com/watchgen.php

His name is Richard Bennett and you can read his testimony on his website: www.bereanbeacon.org

Or you could watch a former presbyterian pastor become one of the best Catholic apologetic there is


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8RMvmrheE0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck1USy2m-oU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfkgY0YIsc8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE4hscgy9a8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ifKJSuKaNk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EwpN36bVTE&feature=related

the more people pay attention to the Bible, the more Catholic they become.

~Lady~:

You see you did good when you cited the catechism as your source in the posts above this one, but here you derail as a bad scholar where you post a historical fact without facts or citations. Show us where you got it from. Thanks.

the guy been doze off when them teach citation in class .

Carlosein:

the guy been doze off when them teach citation in class .

apparently, that's why I sincerely think these people want to be deceitful when they post quotes without citations or sources. They know that it's not credible.

I decided to post these because I think they are very beautiful. It really is for everyone. Olaadegbu and all. Pls watch the videos, they will benefit all Christians, this one isn't about catholic or protestant, It is very beautiful. It is Archbishop Fulton J Sheen (RIP) speaking to the youth about sex. It's amazing how a man who lives as a celibate knows more about sex than those who abuse it. Sex is truly sacred.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZgWOmnSoIY&feature=related Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N2u4QPrK2I&feature=related Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qybg9tA7gKA&feature=related Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWTPpGBTo4g&feature=related Part 4


And now on Mary, you want to watch it too, it is beautiful

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIKW8qjXR7c&feature=related Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdKz-GLzIHQ&feature=related Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FX-nyhG-pXA&feature=related Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lyId61fHIQ&feature=related Part 4

His jokes are hilarious. I love it. Hahaha

@ Lady

apparently, that's why I sincerely think these people want to be deceitful when they post quotes without citations or sources. They know that it's not credible.

Who are you trying to fool? Everything that was posted here had their sources. The historical piece of interest was factual history that can be verified under the Spanish inquisitions. In fact that was only one of the numerous accounts.

So do you need sources to prove the inquisitions that killed millions of bible-believing Christians? Or are you prepared to downplay that such barbaric acts were committed by the so-called church of God?

I notice you are afraid to comment on such postings?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3qL1zhDWl8

Bobbyaf:

@ Lady

Who are you trying to fool? Everything that was posted here had their sources. The historical piece of interest was factual history that can be verified under the Spanish inquisitions. In fact that was only one of the numerous accounts.

So do you need sources to prove the inquisitions that killed millions of bible-believing Christians? Or are you prepared to downplay that such barbaric acts were committed by the so-called church of God?

I notice you are afraid to comment on such postings?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3qL1zhDWl8

Such a bad scholar you are, protestants did not exist at the time of the inquisition. If they did, show me. When did protestant reformation take place and when did the inquisitions take place? Especially the spanish inquisition.

bobbybaff,oladegbu ttalks e.t.c name your differant churches stop hiding under the cloak of prostentalism to conceal your true identities.Who knows some of you might be members of white garment churches