₦airaland Forum

italo:
What is infant Baptism, if not bringing infants for Jesus to touch?

2. You still haven't said anything about Gentiles being judged with their conscience or not. Have you not found a way to change Romans 2? You need more time?

btoks:
What would you say about Jewish parents who circumcised their babies,weren't they making the choice for the babies to make them part of God's people?
In the NT -Gal 3:28 & others,doesn't it say there is neither gentile nor jew for all are one in Jesus Christ? What then stops Christians for making the choice for their kids to be part of Jesus.
You guys seem to think Christianity only started in 2015 with all these weird exegesis.

italo:
Stop lying. I have said several times that I believe all the verses are true.

You are the one who believes some verses were wrongly written.

That Peter said 'baptism is for remission of sin,' but he really meant 'baptism is NOT for the remission of sin.'

You said it was Jesus time in John 2, Jesus said his time hadn't come.

You said Mary's motherhood ended when he started preaching, the Bible called Mary his mother at the foot of the cross.

You said all who lived after Jesus would be judged by their faith in him, the Bible says the gentiles will be judged by their conscience.

You have told too many lies against the scriptures.

...and without remorse.

italo:
Call me when you succeed in changing the word in Luke 18:15 from infants to children.

You're still a learner. Ask Barnabaseloka how he changes scripture to suit his heresies.

Barnabaseloka:
Thank you for showing the bolded but:
1. Did the bolded say that Peter was wrong in what he spoke as you claim that I wrote in my post?
2. Did you not read the words above it where I stated that Peter was right in what he said?
3. Did it bother you to read the remaining of the post to understand what I meant by Peter's words not being correlative?
I was careful in what I wrote and did not fall into the trap you set for me.
Up till now, you have not shown me where I wrote that Peter was wrong in what he said.

I tell you again:
Do not read someone's posts just to find errors and use them against the person, without carefully reading what he meant.
Read and understand so that you can effectively correct any misconstruction or any error in one's posts.
Again, have an open heart to learn from others and do not hold tenaciously to any passge/s that other passages can explain or balance.

Know that some passages in the bible are:
1. Self-explanatory in that you understand them as you read directly from them, without contradicting any other passage.
2. Not self-explanatory in that it will require a background study, comparing one passage with another to get a balanced understanding of them.

italo:
Luke 18:15 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them.

16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

Another lying protestant contradicting the Bible.

italo:
Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." (Matt 19:4)

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

The Baptism of infants
1250    Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.5 The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth. (403, 1996)

Brocab: 'Do not let the little children come to Jesus.'

italo:
The Lord said it to his Church leaders, the apostles, not you or anyone else.

That is why when a dispute broke out, everyone including Paul, went back to the Church leaders in Jerusalem for the correct teaching. They didn't go to the Holy Spirit individually.

And listen to what the Church leaders said:

Acts 15

24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that some going out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls; to whom we gave no commandment:

28 For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things:

So people need authority of the Church to teach authentic Christian doctrine

And it is what the Church teaches that please the Holy Ghost because He is the one that guides the Church to teach.

italo:
Learn then, that water Baptism is the door to Christian life. It is what the Church has taught for 2000 years.

Don't try to teach me that water baptism is useless. It is a teaching that is alien to Christianity.

Read what the early church fathers said about baptism.


That is the reason I ask a lot of questions when I meet someone who purports to know, as I have been doing. Let me ask, have you prayed about this issue of the relevance of Baptism? What did the Lord tell you?



I will give the answers that have been revealed to the Church. End of Story. All my knowledge is from the Catholic Church that has the spiritual authority to teach God's people. The same authority and with which they compiled the Bible in the fourth century.



I am open to learning christian doctrine from God's infallible Church. However, the early Church warned us to flee from false teachers bringing new doctrines like "water baptism is expired."



Anyway, you have a good point. No one knows it all...and it is better to say I don't know than to be contradicting the Bible like you guys are doing with Acts2:38. Just look at how Barnabaseloka is virtually trying to rewrite the Bible to fit in with this heresy.

My advice to you is to learn from God's Church. The early Christians didn't interpret scriptures privately, they didn't even have a Bible. They learnt from the Church. That Church is still existing today. It is the Catholic Church.

It is pride that makes you think you know more than the Church.

italo:
start by tearing away Acts 2:38 and John 3:5 from your Bible...or rewriting them like Barnabaseloka. he said they 'weren't written well.'

italo:
Learn then, that water Baptism is the door to Christian life. It is what the Church has taught for 2000 years.

Don't try to teach me that water baptism is useless. It is a teaching that is alien to Christianity.

Read what the early church fathers said about baptism.


That is the reason I ask a lot of questions when I meet someone who purports to know, as I have been doing. Let me ask, have you prayed about this issue of the relevance of Baptism? What did the Lord tell you?



I will give the answers that have been revealed to the Church. End of Story. All my knowledge is from the Catholic Church that has the spiritual authority to teach God's people. The same authority and with which they compiled the Bible in the fourth century.



I am open to learning christian doctrine from God's infallible Church. However, the early Church warned us to flee from false teachers bringing new doctrines like "water baptism is expired."



Anyway, you have a good point. No one knows it all...and it is better to say I don't know than to be contradicting the Bible like you guys are doing with Acts2:38. Just look at how Barnabaseloka is virtually trying to rewrite the Bible to fit in with this heresy.

My advice to you is to learn from God's Church. The early Christians didn't interpret scriptures privately, they didn't even have a Bible. They learnt from the Church. That Church is still existing today. It is the Catholic Church.

It is pride that makes you think you know more than the Church.

Ubenedictus:
your slimminess is chonic. I certianly have no time for this again. May God touch you heart.

Scholar8200:
There's nothing in my post that suggests a for or against stance; it's just a statement of fact. Besides, no one has suggested that we copy the mistakes of anyone. In the NT, we are under the Lordship of Christ. Meaning all we are and have (not just a tenth) are under His control. Hence we withhold and/or dispense at His command.

Scholar8200:
Well tithing, like circumcision, did not originate from the law! Abraham, the father of those that believe gave tithes to Melchizedek centuries before the law was given!

Ubenedictus:
nobody made up any word, it is a pity your protestant pastors aren't well learned in scriptures that is why you don't know the meaning of a presbyterous, it is a bible word from the original greek. that is the root of the word priest. So when catholics say they have priests they are saying they have presbyterous. So go back and learn the words before misquoting.

Scriptures also show that peter was a presbyterous, i.e a priest! He also was an episcopus i.e a bishop! He later travelled to rome and was the bishop of the church of rome. the bishops of rome are called popes, since peter was the first bishop of rome he was the first pope untill he was matyred.

Lastly the catholic church have married priest, there are still married priests till today, only that the celibate priests are more popular because paul teaches that it is better to be unmarried in order to be devoted to the Lord.

Ubenedictus:
nobody made up any word, it is a pity your protestant pastors aren't well learned in scriptures that is why you don't know the meaning of a presbyterous, it is a bible word from the original greek. that is the root of the word priest. So when catholics say they have priests they are saying they have presbyterous. So go back and learn the words before misquoting.

Scriptures also show that peter was a presbyterous, i.e a priest! He also was an episcopus i.e a bishop! He later travelled to rome and was the bishop of the church of rome. the bishops of rome are called popes, since peter was the first bishop of rome he was the first pope untill he was matyred.

Lastly the catholic church have married priest, there are still married priests till today, only that the celibate priests are more popular because paul teaches that it is better to be unmarried in order to be devoted to the Lord.

SalC:
Where did Uben say Peter was a Presbyterian priest?

gregzone:
[color=#F48700] OP is right but not entirely. Tithing is an obligation to God, its not GIVING! Its like paying your tax and its meant to bring meat into God's house.
Now OP is right giving to the poor is also another variation of giving and just like others it has its own rewards. But that doesn't mean that you won't or can't give to your pastor/prophet, there is an offering called Prophet offering and it also has its own reward.[/color]

egopersonified:
My church just started asking those with their tithe to step out, this is a church I have being attending for over five years, though different branches. And I know the pastor is watching those like me that have never stepped out, I am just waiting for him to ask me one day, make me give am my own version of tithing.

SalC:
What you wrote to Uben was your reply to him not me.

You called me a liar when I said he didn't write that, now you have to prove me a liar or accept you are the liar here.
You grow down!

SalC:
^^^This won't pacify me.

Liar brocab, stop trying hard to make sense because you are not. How difficult is it to provide where Uben said Peter was a presbyterian priest?

Stop beating about the bush and provide it. Like I care about your "adult nonsense"?

SalC:
You need someone to beat some truthful sense into your grey mater, my request was clear enough " provide any sign post with such name and official church document to prove it" I even went as far as giving you a documented proof that the church never at any time adopted that name. Until you can prove yourself, you remain the childish one here. So keep your photoshop work to yourself for there is no truth here let alone enough truth.

Btw I notice you jumped my other post, am still waiting for you to provide where Uben said Peter was a presbyterian priest,

And sorry I don't support liars

Ubenedictus:
i never said he was a presbyterian, I said he was a presbyterous (priest), presbyterous is the greek root word from which we got the word priest in English.

SalC:
*in Pilate's voice* what is truth?

Ubenedictus:
for the sake of those reading the thread, I never said peter was a presbyterian priest, brocab is simply trying to make a fool of himself by misquoting me.

SalC:
I have, but can't find where he said so, you should prove to me he said so.

SalC:

SalC:
Can you show me where Uben said the bold?

Ubenedictus:
I GIVE UP