thinkmoney:

The instances we have of every baptism in the Bible is that of adults. Jesus the don of God and John the baptism themselves weren’t baptized when they were young though they had access to the temple and synagogue.
Every instance is baptism of adults.
And it’s this argument of Catholic that Bible is not the only guidance that has made the church not to have boundaries.
But Timothy said the Bible is complete and able to reprove and direct. All the early Christians and Bible people were directed by the Bible. Their life conformed with the Bible. The Bible as Gods words was the “lamp” to there feet.
And let me tell you, the Bible was before the church. Jesus met the Bible. He quoted the Bible.
The church is beget from the word. The word which is the Bible is the stamp on the church. How can I prove this? Jesus said people will know that you are my people if YOU OBEY MY COMMANDMENTS. Where is the commandments? In the Bible. A church that do not follow this is not Christ people. The church is not a Christian and it in actual fact not a church.
I have cut out the part we’re the Vatican said the church is open to gay marriage.( Do you read with open mind?)
...In October, he suggested that the Church would be open to bless same-sex couples, as he told a group of cardinals "we cannot be judges who only deny, reject and exclude".

1st and foremost, Jesus didn't meet the Bible, he met the Thora which is the old testament in the Bible today. Then it's just book by book not binded together in one book.

Secondly the Bible as we have it now came into existence some 300yrs after Jesus, so the earliest Christians didn't have the Bible, infact most are illitrates so they couldn't even read. They were taught and they believe what they listened to.

Thirdly since there's no where in the Bible that said only Adults should be baptized or baptising kids is wrong, why are you against that. Baptism is like immunisation, we immunise our kids without their consent because we know it's good for them. Baptism is the new convenant that replaces circumsition. Jews don't circumcise adults but children. (This is just an analogy). They fact it's not explicitly stated in the Bible doesn't mean it's sinful or wrong to baptise a baby. Remember Jesus himself said don't stop babies from coming to him, or do you want to disobey Jesus?

Fourthly the Pope never said the church will wed gay people. Go and read carefully what he said

(What Pope Francis’ Statement About Possible Blessings for Same-Sex Couples Could Mean
BY SOLCYRE BURGA
OCTOBER 4, 2023 10:22 AM EDT
A response letter to five conservative cardinals who were asking Pope Francis to clarify whether blessings of same-sex unions are permitted went public on Monday, signaling a slight shift in the Catholic Church’s previous stance on LGBTQ+ unions.

“We cannot be judges who only deny, push back and exclude,” Pope Francis wrote in a July letter. “As such, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or several people, that do not convey a wrong idea of a matrimony. Because when one seeks a blessing, one is requesting help from God.” It's a step back from a 2021 Vatican statement—made by an official who Francis has since removed—that said blessings of same-sex couples were not permitted. )

This is a suggestion, that a priest based on his discretion can bless not the marriage but the individual or individuals who seek for blessing. We Catholics normally present ourselves or sacramentals for blessing by the Priest.

Are you saying the priest should refuse to bless a transgender or lesbian or gay who ask for the priests blessing?

Most are even getting blessed because they hide their identity.

thinkmoney:

1) no the Pope didn’t say that gay is not a sin.


I do not even know how u brought up that question. I am saying the Pope do not conform with the Bible by baptizing professed gays. Or intending to perform same sex marriage

2) no the Bible does not authorize.



But then the only instances of baptism in the Bible is that of people that have repented. So a priest will not baptize A PROFESSED GAY.
I may be gay now and a priest can baptize me so far as I say I have repented. But a priest will not baptize me when I still profess I am a gay or when I remain in sane sex union. It didn’t happen in the bible

God will not come down to the earth to conduct the baptism on anybody. Conducting the baptism is solely left for man. The spiritual essence of baptism is salvation, which means to enable someone inherit the kingdom of God after leaving this earth. The salvation is between God and the baptized person. Another explanation is the holy ghost baptism. A priest conducts the baptism but is not responsible for the manifestation of the holy ghost baptism. So in this case, the Church does its own part by baptizing those who claim they need baptism. Whether the baptism is effective enough to take those people to heaven or not is left for God to decide. In conclusion, you have no biblical fact against what the Pope said.

thinkmoney:

You may not be in the know or you are in Denial. I will leave a bbc link here where the Vatican say the church is open to same sex marriage... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67390366.amp

This link doesn't show anywhere the pope mentioned same sex marriage. Blessing of individual and blessing of marriage are two different things. So don't get confused. I state again the Catholic Church will never wed gay people. Not in our life time and even beyond.

What you guys are trying to do is to just pick a snippet of the Pope's untterance without fully reading and digesting everything he said and run to create sensational headlines to discredit the Catholic Church.

We have had very very bad popes in the church that did extremely abominable things but the church is still standing.

The Pope was a priest, Bishop, Cardinal and then pope, He's not the last Authority in the Catholic Church, Jesus Christ is the final authority.

The Pope can make an error as a human. If he makes any pronouncements as in his personal capacity as a priest, it's not binding on the church unless when he speaks ex cathedra.

To say that the pope is infallible does not mean to say that the pope as a person is completely free from error. The only statements from the pope that are considered infallible are ex cathedra statements. The definition of an ex cathedra statement was solidified at the first Vatican Council. In order to be an ex cathedra statement, the statement must fulfill the following criteria: the pope must be speaking for the Church as a pastor and doctor of all Christians; he must be teaching on a doctrine of faith or morals; he must intend to determine a point of doctrine in a final way; and it must be clear that the pope means to bind the whole Church through the statement he is making.

cococandy:

I love the Catholic church but if would be more vocal in condemning priests who sexually molest young children, I might consider coming back.

The progressive stance (while awesome) makes no meaning to me if they still shield sexual abuse by some of their “anointed” men of God. They should be publicly excommunicated.

Please come back we miss you

thinkmoney:

The instances we have of every baptism in the Bible is that of adults. Jesus the don of God and John the baptism themselves weren’t baptized when they were young though they had access to the temple and synagogue.
Every instance is baptism of adults.
And it’s this argument of Catholic that Bible is not the only guidance that has made the church not to have boundaries.
But Timothy said the Bible is complete and able to reprove and direct. All the early Christians and Bible people were directed by the Bible. Their life conformed with the Bible. The Bible as Gods words was the “lamp” to there feet.
And let me tell you, the Bible was before the church. Jesus met the Bible. He quoted the Bible.
The church is beget from the word. The word which is the Bible is the stamp on the church. How can I prove this? Jesus said people will know that you are my people if YOU OBEY MY COMMANDMENTS. Where is the commandments? In the Bible. A church that do not follow this is not Christ people. The church is not a Christian and it in actual fact not a church.
I have cut out the part we’re the Vatican said the church is open to gay marriage.( Do you read with open mind?)
...In October, he suggested that the Church would be open to bless same-sex couples, as he told a group of cardinals "we cannot be judges who only deny, reject and exclude".

Another thing I want to correct is this, John the Baptist wasn't Baptized, he introduced Baptism, he even told Jesus that he John should be the one asking Jesus for baptism. When the Jews were coming to John for baptism, they Bible didn't record their names and ages, so it's possible children too came and they didn't come as righteous people, they came as Sinners, it was after listening to John that they repented and got baptized.

It's not only the Catholic Church that baptises infants, even Martin Luther baptises infants.

Infants baptism started thousands of years and no one complained. Even the person that brought Reformation didn't condemed it.

Emeraldicon:


1st and foremost, Jesus didn't meet the Bible, he met the Thora which is the old testament in the Bible today. Then it's just book by book not binded together in one book.

Secondly the Bible as we have it now came into existence some 300yrs after Jesus, so the earliest Christians didn't have the Bible, infact most are illitrates so they couldn't even read. They were taught and they believe what they listened to.

Thirdly since there's no where in the Bible that said only Adults should be baptized or baptising kids is wrong, why are you against that. Baptism is like immunisation, we immunise our kids without their consent because we know it's good for them. Baptism is the new convenant that replaces circumsition. Jews don't circumcise adults but children. (This is just an analogy). They fact it's not explicitly stated in the Bible doesn't mean it's sinful or wrong to baptise a baby. Remember Jesus himself said don't stop babies from coming to him, or do you want to disobey Jesus?

Fourthly the Pope never said the church will wed gay people. Go and read carefully what he said

(What Pope Francis’ Statement About Possible Blessings for Same-Sex Couples Could Mean
BY SOLCYRE BURGA
OCTOBER 4, 2023 10:22 AM EDT
A response letter to five conservative cardinals who were asking Pope Francis to clarify whether blessings of same-sex unions are permitted went public on Monday, signaling a slight shift in the Catholic Church’s previous stance on LGBTQ+ unions.

“We cannot be judges who only deny, push back and exclude,” Pope Francis wrote in a July letter. “As such, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or several people, that do not convey a wrong idea of a matrimony. Because when one seeks a blessing, one is requesting help from God.” It's a step back from a 2021 Vatican statement—made by an official who Francis has since removed—that said blessings of same-sex couples were not permitted. )

This is a suggestion, that a priest based on his discretion can bless not the marriage but the individual or individuals who seek for blessing. We Catholics normally present ourselves or sacramentals for blessing by the Priest.

Are you saying the priest should refuse to bless a transgender or lesbian or gay who ask for the priests blessing?

Most are even getting blessed because they hide their identity.

Your argument stems from Satan attempt to confuse things.
Bible or scripture is synonymous.
Bible from the word biblia simply means book. This very word for book overtime has been used to refer to Christian scripture which contains the Torah and the gospel.
So
1) Jesus met the Torah which is part of the Bible. More than 2/3 part actually.
And by the time Jesus was here, the Torah had already been canonized and compiled. The Sanhedrin some centuries before Christ had appointed about 72 people to see to it.
Study history and say only things you know. Jesus could easily fetch Isaiah in the synagogue because these books were available and they have been canonized.
2) the ancients weren’t mostly illiterates. They passed on knowledge to themselves. They attended the synagogue from young and they memorized as many Bible verses as they can just as muslim children do till now (it’s a practice they inherited from ancient time) kids were home trained to read. Timothy was him trained for example.
It then either an intentional lie on your part or ignorance to say the Bible as we know about it now came 300 years after Christ death. The last book of the Bible was written by John an Apostle of christ. By about 50years AD Bible wetting have already been completed. First century Christians had access to the Bible.
What happened in 300 ad was canonization. It’s an effort by the church to seave out books that had already started cropping in with pseudo names and formalize the books. Old Testament like I told you had already been canonized.


3) like I told you you may not have basic knowledge of the Bible.
-we do not only follow what is explicitly said in the Bible we also follow example and study instances. That’s why a book in the Bible was specifically called ACTS OF THE APOSTLES or PRACTICAL EXAMPLES BY THE APOSTLES. In all of the Bible kids were not baptized. Or we could very much then baptize the death as some churches even do.
I tell you that if churches go beyond Bible then boundaries are broken. You won’t just know when to stop. You will be moving away step after step. You notice what you quoted at the last when you said “a shift from former stance”. That is how shifts (gradual or fast) will be happening without something to use to measure which the Bible is.
-how can you equate children coming to Jesus to baptism? Jesus made that statement when he castigated people from trying to pursue Children from approaching Jesus to listen to him. Ofcourse children go to church and listen. Children that make informed choices to repent and get baptized aren’t babies. Babies do not have that ability.
- and baptism isn’t anything like immunization. It’s a public display of repentance and conversion.

3) are you saying BBC reportage of the Vatican saying they are open to sane sex is wrong? Why living in denial? Aren’t you seeing the church is shifting to accepting this things and hence conforming to the world?
Anybody ofcourse can come for blessing. But the church of God will never even envisage joining together man and man

Emeraldicon:


Another thing I want to correct is this, John the Baptist wasn't Baptized, he introduced Baptism, he even told Jesus that he John should be the one asking Jesus for baptism. When the Jews were coming to John for baptism, they Bible didn't record their names and ages, so it's possible children too came and they didn't come as righteous people, they came as Sinners, it was after listening to John that they repented and got baptized.

It's not only the Catholic Church that baptises infants, even Martin Luther baptises infants.

Infants baptism started thousands of years and no one complained. Even the person that brought Reformation didn't condemed it.

Now I will show you my heart and the way I argue and my readiness to admit mistakes. You are right that John wasn’t baptized. We first read about baptism from his activities. However, it appears it has become a culture for people to go to public streams to show publicly their conversion.
Still, those coming even from John to Jesus to get baptize even if their are children among them, are there babies?
Martin Luther as a former Catholic inherited a practice that isn’t supported by the Bible. He attempted to cleanse the church but we can imagine he may not know everything that needs correcting

Emeraldicon:


This link doesn't show anywhere the pope mentioned same sex marriage. Blessing of individual and blessing of marriage are two different things. So don't get confused. I state again the Catholic Church will never wed gay people. Not in our life time and even beyond.

What you guys are trying to do is to just pick a snippet of the Pope's untterance without fully reading and digesting everything he said and run to create sensational headlines to discredit the Catholic Church.

We have had very very bad popes in the church that did extremely abominable things but the church is still standing.

The Pope was a priest, Bishop, Cardinal and then pope, He's not the last Authority in the Catholic Church, Jesus Christ is the final authority.

The Pope can make an error as a human. If he makes any pronouncements as in his personal capacity as a priest, it's not binding on the church unless when he speaks ex cathedra.

To say that the pope is infallible does not mean to say that the pope as a person is completely free from error. The only statements from the pope that are considered infallible are ex cathedra statements. The definition of an ex cathedra statement was solidified at the first Vatican Council. In order to be an ex cathedra statement, the statement must fulfill the following criteria: the pope must be speaking for the Church as a pastor and doctor of all Christians; he must be teaching on a doctrine of faith or morals; he must intend to determine a point of doctrine in a final way; and it must be clear that the pope means to bind the whole Church through the statement he is making.

Did you read where it said the VATICAN may be open to same sex marriage.
God bless you for admitting there have been terrible popes.
But I hope you know now that transgender and gay will start getting baptized? Getting baptized is different from attending church oh. So you won’t ask me if they should be thrown out.
This are small small shifts I mentioned. Small small giving of grounds. This was unthinkable just some couple of years ago. Now I tell you that same sex marriage from developments now isn’t anymore unthinkable

immortalcrown:
God will not come down to the earth to conduct the baptism on anybody. Conducting the baptism is solely left for man. The spiritual essence of baptism is salvation, which means to enable someone inherit the kingdom of God after leaving this earth. The salvation is between God and the baptized person. Another explanation is the holy ghost baptism. A priest conducts the baptism but is not responsible for the manifestation of the holy ghost baptism. So in this case, the Church does its own part by baptizing those who claim they need baptism. Whether the baptism is effective enough to take those people to heaven or not is left for God to decide. In conclusion, you have no biblical fact against what the Pope said.

Baptizing isn’t salvation. In the Bible it was an action people take after repentance and conversion or to start a serious ministry. A professed gay or somebody that remains in same sex union would never get baptized in the Bible.
This my Bible position was just until very recently the Catholic Church position. But gradually gradually they are giving ground and shifting. Gradually gradually they are conforming to the world. Why? Because they do not based all their doctrines and practices on the Bible, hence they have no clear boundaries

thinkmoney:

Did you read where it said the VATICAN may be open to same sex marriage.
God bless you for admitting there have been terrible popes.
But I hope you know now that transgender and gay will start getting baptized? Getting baptized is different from attending church oh. So you won’t ask me if they should be thrown out.
This are small small shifts I mentioned. Small small giving of grounds. This was unthinkable just some couple of years ago. Now I tell you that same sex marriage from developments now isn’t anymore unthinkable

The Vatican didn't say such. Open to same sex blessing isn't the same as same sex marriage.

I read the article even before you sent the link.

Go and read the Pope's letter completely.

And be sincere and objective. I assure you the Catholic Church can and will never wed same sex couples.

The Catechism of the church defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Jesus himself affirm marriage to be between a man and a woman. So please stop spreading false hood.

Even if the pope says he is open to the pope doesn't have the power to just on his own mandate Catholics to wed same sex couples. The whole church through the bishops must agree. That's what happens during church councils.

thinkmoney:

Baptizing isn’t salvation. In the Bible it was an action people take after repentance and conversion or to start a serious ministry. A professed gay or somebody that remains in same sex union would never get baptized in the Bible.
This my Bible position was just until very recently the Catholic Church position. But gradually gradually they are giving ground and shifting. Gradually gradually they are conforming to the world. Why? Because they do not based all their doctrines and practices on the Bible, hence they have no clear boundaries

Thats your believe, Baptism isn't to show conversion. But for Salvation, the Bible says Baptism now saves you. That's why the church baptise both infants and adults.

And there's no where in the Bible that says it's wrong to baptise infants. If one is without sin, he or she doesn't need baptism. Jesus doesn't need baptism and so do John but He was Baptized to show us the importance.

thinkmoney:

Baptizing isn’t salvation. In the Bible it was an action people take after repentance and conversion or to start a serious ministry. A professed gay or somebody that remains in same sex union would never get baptized in the Bible.
This my Bible position was just until very recently the Catholic Church position. But gradually gradually they are giving ground and shifting. Gradually gradually they are conforming to the world. Why? Because they do not based all their doctrines and practices on the Bible, hence they have no clear boundaries

You are wrong. Baptism is a public declaration of Christian faith. It means the person has accepted to be a follower of Christ. Isn't following Christ about salvation?

thinkmoney:

Which other Bible do you know? Because I know you may want to start questioning the validity and sanctity of the bible

Be specific, you could be referring to the Satanic Bible.