₦airaland Forum

Emary:
The purpose of baptism is to bring the person, child or adult, into the family of Christ. It washes away the original sin of Adam which everyone is born with. This is the reason for infant baptism in the Catholic Church. As they grow, they are taught more about the faith. At the age of reason which is about 7 years, they get to go to confession and then partake in Holy Communion through which they are sanctified. Jesus made it clear that we are to confess our sins to one another and whatever would be forgiven on earth would be forgiven in heaven or vice versa. In Acts 10, Cornelius and his entire household were baptized. Jesus also tells us to suffer the children to come unto me. It's all biblical, though subject to interpretation.

Personally, it's all my early childhood indoctrination that carried me through until I actually built a better relationship with God.

Did you not read and learn from Jesus that water cannot wash away a person's defilement as it comes from within?

Dtruthspeaker:
Do you not see that he said that Jesus did not come to die?

"The idea that Jesus came specifically to die is a theological interpretation that developed later."

the purpose of Jesus coming can't be said that he came to die bro, but yeah he died but the death isn't the main point of his coming but part of the message of salvation in that Jesus rose from the dead which can't occur without him dying.

If you truly believe Jesus came to die then his didn't have to be born, nor grow up and teach, all he had to do was come and die and stay dead. This is what he wrote "The idea that Jesus came specifically to die... " which isn't the SPECIFIC REASON Jesus came.

Shey there's a church that celebrates his death every sunday, lol

Lol seeing a lot of blanks means some punks have come here to post, glad I don't need to view them.

The only thing I see off from what theawakensoul wrote is that Paul's theology formed Christianity, that would be incorrect seeing that he like the rest of the believers called themselves followers of the Way.

Anyway Jesus dying for sins wasn't a later theology, it was in scriptures before Jesus was born and even thought by Jesus himself, now I do agree that Jesus was murdered as even himself said so before his own death and that how it played out. So Jesus was murdered he didn't commit suicide.


I also absolutely agree that God never needed blood, and the blood of Jesus isn't for God but for sinners coming to repentance and the main reason is to purchase them from the devil. The wicked took his blood as the price to let "us" go. So we are set free and overcome first by that price paid on our behalf that the second death passes over us.

God so loved us that he sent us his son Jesus not for us to kill him but for us to believe in him, listen to him and obey him, even knowing that those who hate Him will kill his son He made even his death of value and rose him up after three days.

The blood of Jesus stands as a testimony against the devil that a man can live without sin and overcome his temptation, a symbol of his defeat bore evidence with the resurrection from the grave, from death above the powers of the wicked.

So everything and all worked out for our good. And that's why Jesus had to teach them from scriptures why the Messiah had to die and rise again.

Yes he was murdered Peter preached it, Paul preached it and those involved hated it, though they didn't preach that to condemn them but to celebrate the glory of God revealed through his resurrection, they failed to repent from their mistake and continued to persecute them.

So while I do agree with certain points in the OP I see no evidence from the involvement of Paul in said corruption of God's word

APOSTLECHUMA:
A RIGHTEOUS GOD WILL BE UNJUST TO SEND A CHILD TO HELL FOR SIN THAT ADAM AND EVE COMMITTED OVER 6000YERS AGO. JESUS CHRIST DIED AND TOOK AWAY THAT SIN AND GOD WILL NEVER SEND ANY ONE TO HELL FOR IT AS IT HAS BEEN WASHED AWAY. ANY ONE THAT WILL GO TO HELL AFTER THE WORK OF SALVATION AT CALVARY WILL DO SO FOR REJECTING GRACE, NOT BECAUSE OF ADAM'S SIN. THE KINGDOM OF GOD, CHRIST SAID, BELONGS TO CHILDREN AND THEY DONT GO TO HELL REGARDLESS OF HOW SINFUL THEIR PARENTS WERE. BECAUSE THAT SIN HAS BEEN WASHED AWAY. UNTIL A CHILD GETS TO THE AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY, WHERE THE CHILD CAN DIFFERENTIATE B/ W WRONG AND RIGHT, THAT CHILD WILL HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HELL. CATHOLICS CLAIM THAT PETER WAS THE FIRST POPE BUT THE FIRST POPE WAS MARRIED AND HAD A FAMILY WHILE PRESENT DAY POPES AND PASTORS THEY CALL REV FATHERS TRAMPLE UPON GOD'S COMMANDMENT BY NOT GETTING MARRIED. THEIR FIRST POPE PLACED REPENTANCE BEFORE BAPTISM IN ACTS 2-38, JUST LIKE IN MARK 16-16 AND LUKE 24-47. BAPTISM IS FOR THOSE WHO HAVE GROWN UP TO THE AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY NOT ENFANTS. ENFANTS ARE TO BE DEDICATED JUST THE WAY IT WAS DONE TO CHRIST, NOT TO BE BAPTISED, THATS WHY WE HAVE CHILD DEDICATION. cfountainoftruth@yahoo.com

bro Jesus didn't die because of Adam's sin but for "our" sins, "our" being those who become or have been friends of Jesus, followers obedient to God's word.

immortalcrown:
You are confusing yourself.

First of all, it seems you do not believe in original sin. No adult has stopped committing sins after being baptised. Yes, baptism is meant to discourage sin. But baptism does not mean that sin has become impossible in the person's life. So, The main significance of baptism is cleansing of original sin. Baptism is a ritual that demonstrates belief. Those who believe in original sin accept infant baptism for babies.

the question I have now after following your wonderful convo is, do you or you guys believe that water baptism is for the removal of original sin which you translate to mean inherited sin?

Next question is, did Abel inherit the said sin?

Daniluv1:
Child water baptism is very wrong by not letting that child grow enough to decide if he or she wants to be baptized, baptizing should be a choice and not hereditary

I have been reading this from others not just you, "child baptism is wrong" let the child grow up, have we ever thought about CIRCUMCISION like or I will let my son grow up and decide if he wants to go through the painful process of circumcision.

I don't support deeping a child into water or sprinking but I do support a child receiving the Holy Spirit and circumcision of their hearts, make them prophesy while they are still sucklings.

But if we keep saying child water baptism is wrong because they are "too" young that's not a valid excuse sha.

If salvation is based on oh you must hear and understand the Gospel then many illiterates are in hear abi, I believe the must important thing or the first thing is one's heart and that why it's written we believe in our hearts, if a child or an illiterates heart is right with God then he who gives the Holy Spirit, who sees the heart and judges it can baptize and fill an infant with the Holy Spirit, it is a gift with age limit.

Alfred200825:
Is Child Dedication even Biblical?

Luke.2.23 The law of the Lord says, "If a woman's first child is a boy, he must be dedicated to the Lord." (NLT) bro Jesus was dedicated according to the law which is in the Bible

Zionmdde:
Ref: Roman's chapter 6

Now go ahead and give me references for child baptism

did you read the OP, if you did you won't ask me for "references"

Now Romans 6, from Rom.6.4 - 5
For we died and were buried with Christ by baptism. And just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorious power of the Father, now we also may live new lives. Since we have been united with him in his death, we will also be raised as he was.

Now it does say we have resurrected, does it? Obviously not.

We died to sin, not physically died

Rom.6.6 - Our old sinful selves were crucified with Christ so that sin might lose its power in our lives. We are no longer slaves to sin.
Rom.6.7 - For when we died with Christ we were set free from the power of sin.
Rom.6.8 - And since we died with Christ, we know we will also share his new life.

Now the baptism Paul teaches is not water baptism, which he himself did not practice. It is the baptism of the holy Spirit.

Acts.11.16 - Then I thought of the Lord's words when he said, 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'
Acts.11.17 - And since God gave these Gentiles the same gift he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to argue?"


1Cor.12.13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body--whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free--and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

BrosG007:
Whether it is right or wrong is not the issue here, the issue is what's does a child knows or what's his or her conventions, intentions - no perspectives or ideologies to warrant baptism?

This is just one of the flaws of religion....truth every new born are born atheist.....his or her religion or ideologies are derived from his or her surroundings or family of birth

"born atheists" abeg explain? Are you saying every new born was born believing their is no God?

MyExpression:
Is BAPTISM as a whole, right or wrong?

The first person to enter heaven after The death of Christ, wasn't baptised.

what if he was, and I don't mean water baptism?

Zionmdde:
What is you described is not baptism, baptism signifies death to sin, burial and resurrection in Christ. That's why you immerse the person in water (death) and raise him up (resurrection)

Now that process can only be valid with Roman's 10:9
And a baby cannot believe in Jesus nor confess his Lordship and therefore not qualified for salvation

signifies? More like symbolizes, because none actually occurs during the said baptism, neither does the person die nor do they resurrect to eternal life at water baptism

Djlast:
I believe a child's fate should not be decided by parenting.
Most parents end up destabilising their ward's potentials by personal choices. Let a child grow and choose

so how will a child grow without parenting

Nteogwuija:
A hired killer(a man) suddenly gave his life to Christ and then baptism clears him of the murders he committed, and then he goes to heaven when he dies.

Then those he killed, the ones who were "sinners", would rot in hell because they didn't have the chance the murderer had because the murderer cut short their lives.

Make this make sense to me, abeg.

they go to hell not because they were killed but for their own sins, so even if they were not killed they may just live longer and go there later abi.

Now is it better for say 10 people to go to hell or one less person to go?

Dtruthspeaker:
Before, the white bandits brought their writing down of laws, the Yorubas, ibos, Benins, Ijaws etc were already practicing all the laws you know today as Criminal Law, Law of contracts and upholding the rights of a child.

And no where have you seen a child younger than 7years being held criminally responsible.

And even from back then till tomorrow you would hear "leave am. Na pikin. When hin grow, hin go understand say dis things no good as you dey teach am".

And go and examine the Bible, no where did you see God or anyone put a child on trial.

From Genesis to revelations, they are all adults or young people. No child

true

manuelkel:
You don't receive salvation by being deeped into water, baptism is a segregation of Christian faith. It significance rests on the acceptance of Christian faith and not salvation. Every religious belief have a way of accepting such religious faith, accepting a religious faith like Christianity through baptism does not mean you already have achieved salvation.....

true

Lukuluku69:
He raised the dead? Good of him.

Now you are talking baptism of a child if I am correct, did he command you to such? If yes, then do it.

That's the right path.

water baptism(which is of John)? Or baptism of Jesus Christ?

Dtruthspeaker:
It is the guilty that are cast in prison, so what offences would a child be guilty of to be delivered to hel?

Even, ye ivu men acknowledge that a child under 7yrs is not criminally responsible. Child Rights Act/ Criminal Code

CRA was done in 2003, Criminal Code in 1916 so before then what happened? Were there no children?

Even thou Deut. 21 mentions stoning a rebellious child I doubt a 3yr old counts (I haven't seen a toddler be a drunkard)

Does the law of God have an age prohibition or exception because can't say children don't do wrong and seeing as the said laws doesn't excuse ignorance and it is still punishable

Lukuluku69:
Do what Jesus did. Follow his examples. If you do, you are on right path and not those of men.

So, search scriptures and see what Jesus did and commanded his disciples to do.

Chikena.

Jesus did a lot of things especially raising the dead, walking on water so which of them should you do and walk on the right path

Itu404 "man cannot attain righteousness" yet Noah was called righteous and Abraham attained it by his faith, what of Job and Daniel commended by God for being righteous?

WantsandMore:
That's not true, the wages of sin is death case in point, Samson died a painful death. To think that Samson birth was a divine revelation by an angel

he died because he loved the wrong woman

God bless the OP for the wonderful post 👍👍👍👍

Rev.19.10 At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."


No testimony is greater at building faith than the testimony of Jesus

Forsake your life and follow Jesus

John.12.25 The man who loves his life will lose it, while the man who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.

Rev.12.11 They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death.

As many around the world celebrate a festive season they believe to be the birth of Christ Jesus, who later at around 30yr of age got water baptized by his cousin, John the Baptist, we try to consider what appropriate age is right for water baptism if it is required at all.

On the subject of age, of all those recorded baptisims in the new testament only the age of Jesus was mentioned.

I have heard some argue that if a child wasn't baptized or holy water didn't touch the child, if the child died they would go to hell. While I have also heard some others say no to child water baptism, and among them some claim a certain age where it doesn't matter what they do they are innocent before God and as such if they die they go "back to their maker".

I believe the whole purpose of water baptism was to reveal who the anointed son of God is and that's why Jesus went to fulfill and do what was right and was revealed as God's son in whom God's well pleased. Shortly after Jesus's baptism, John gets arrested and beheaded. Now some may say John's disciples and those of Jesus baptized with water but Jesus didn't do so.

Jesus does baptize us but with the living water, the Holy Spirit. So I like Paul believe in this baptism and not water baptism, which nullifies the argument of if a new born or toddler or children of certain age bracket should be deeped into water or not. Though children are not innocent as many of them lie, steal and do a lot of wrong things mainly out of ignorance. I doubt John the Baptist deeped them into the Jordan River, well maybe he did, as it won't kill even an infant to be deeped into water but the whole purpose of that baptism was a symbol that those who went to John were repenting from their sins and forsaking their past lives. It's also possible that the household baptisms mentioned in acts were not water nor involved deeping little children into water.

What do you think should your child be deeped into water to receive salvation or not?

Because Trinity is a false doctrine not from God, who isn't an author of such confusion.

Anyway why is Ireanaeus in that list of those who were not Trinitarians, because I have seen quotes where he claimed Jesus is God. @muslim100

MaxInDHouse:
If he ask you what Daniel meant by fire please tell him that Daniel himself asked God for the meaning of these symbolic terms but God told him it's not for him or his generation to understand what it means:

I heard the answer, but I really didn’t understand. So I asked, “Sir, what will happen after all this comes true?” Daniel 12:8

God responded:

“Go on about your life Daniel. The message is hidden. It will be a secret until the time of the end. Daniel 12:9

So the meaning of all these symbolic terms were hidden until our own time and only true servants of God will know the meaning Jesus said it's these anointed Christians that will teach his real disciples in the end time the meaning of all these signs! Matthew 24:45

For your information the Bible book of Daniel 12:1 revealed that archangel Michael is the one who will lead servants of God to unravel all these sacred secrets well if you are willing to accept it Jesus Christ is the hidden archangel Michael so only those who recognize his presence will understand!

look we know you don't preach Jesus Christ of Nazareth you preach Jehovah's witness but at times you have to respectfully KYMShut.

You don't care if people's souls are saved but solely care about growing some sect or cult upon the earth with you myopic believes even if they contradict the word of God. You are like the Pharisees, you won't enter the kingdom of God but you won't let others enter as well.

Look at you shameless sharing deceptive tactics to avoid one from honestly evaluately what is written.

thinkmoney:
You are obviously not a good Bible student.
Daniels vision (or dream) like Joseph’s, Isaiah’s, Ezekiel’s and Johns all use animal or some bizarre looking creatures to represent things.
7 cows represents seven years in Joseph’s case. It’s noteworthy however, that the creatures in Daniel, Ezekiel and Johns visions are similar. They represents things that will happen in the last days.
The creatures, things and event in this visions represents things and ideas. The Angel explained to Daniel that the animals are kingdoms (like I explained the creature at Revelation to that it represents political powers of the earth). The Angel didn’t explain the fire from Gods throne. However, putting Bible together one will come to the conclusion that the fire represents destructive power of God to bring judgement to erring nations and power, both physical and spiritual.
The fire coming out of the throne like the lake of fire in Revelation is used to pass judgement. It’s used to destroy and bring to nonexistence.
“Our God will come and cannot remain silent.
Before him is a consuming fire,
And a great storm rages all around him.” Psalm 50:3.

Our God will come and cannot remain silent.
Before him is a consuming fire,
And a great storm rages all around him.

Fire goes before him
And consumes his adversaries on every side. Psalm 97:3.

This fire represents the destructive ability of God and his capability to render judgement.

I will give you an example from that same passage in Daniel. The four beast represents four world powers that will still come after Daniel.
We have had Babylon, Greece, Rome and now we are in the last one -Anglo-Saxon- power. It will soon get divided into several powers. We are entering that phase of multipolar world where China is coming up, India too, Russia and several others.
These other powers that have gone were burned by the fire. They were made to cease to exist. But if you are a good student of history, you will know that Babylon, Rome, and Greece where in no time burned by a big inferno that destroyed them and they are not in any hell.
But they have met there end. They have been consumed by the fire from God.
The serving political powers today represented by the beast, the false prophet, Devil himself, sinners, grave and death will soon be destroyed as it where by this fire of God [or from God]. They will all go into non-existence

Deception is an art, your sophistry an amusing act

Daniel wrote signs and symbols of which were interpreted by the wisdom of God even in the said text, your long yarns were not needed from some trying to evaluate others as Bible students or not, something you are clearly not.

NOW IN CONTEXT OF DANIEL 7 the fire wasn't metaphorically, now you obviously know that is the truth as you have not and cannot give a metaphorically meaning or usage to the fire but dance around with what the beasts and other symbols represent.


Why don't you also call the ancient one metaphorically or the son of man metaphorically as well.

Thank God the remaining verses in that Daniel 7 explained the symbols used metaphorically.

May God help and possibly forgive you.

thinkmoney:
Maybe I don’t know the meaning of metaphor. Because I don’t understand this fuss.
Ok, what I mean all the while is that the lake of fire is not a literal burning fire, it’s an analogy to represent things coming to an end- being put out of existence. Bad people, the beast, Satan, death, grave all get thrown into this FIGURATIVE lake of fire, which means SECOND DEATH.
So if you will continue making fuss and keep saying the lake is a literal fire then fare there well bro. I don try for you.
If your head block others are not that irredeemable.

"an analogy to represent 'things' coming to an end" which things? Things you said were not material abi, okay so your metaphorically meaning is that the lake of fire means to bring to an end things, put them out of existence but did you skip the part where is was written, they were THROWN IN ALIVE chap. 19, then chap. 20 THEY WILL BE TORMENTED DAILY FOREVER

SOOOO TELL US HOW TO THEY END DAILY FOREVER
and WHYYYYY

is what you are saying contradicting the phrase written in the text

basanisthesontai which means torment not end them

Dan.7.10 - 11
and a river of fire flowed from his presence. Millions of angels ministered to him, and a hundred million stood to attend him. Then the court began its session, and the books were opened. I continued to watch because I could hear the little horn's boastful speech. I kept watching until the fourth beast was killed and its body was destroyed by fire.

Thinkmoney if Jesus was using "Gehenna" what was Daniel using here?

thinkmoney:
It’s important for you to know that Christians have some fundamental general assumptions about the meaning of things, but if you understand the Bible really, you will know that these popular assumptions might be wrong. The Bible prophesied that in our days, deceivers will come out deceiving MANY. It advised that he that think he stands should do a reassessment.

You have to have the calmness and condition of mind to listen to things that are radically different from what you have known.



*First the beast there is not even a literal beast. It’s an imaginary animal that is used to describe the Worldwide political system. It rules over “every tribe and people and tongue and nation,” so it is greater than a single national government.
This shows how the political set up of the world, it’s leaders were used to do Satans bidding. So you see that in consistence with the metaphoric value of Revelation, the wild beast isn’t just a literal entity, but an animal that symbolizes a system.

*The false prophet too, isn't just an individual, but it represents individuals and organizations that skillfully teach people things that take them away from God or make them question God. The theory of evolution and its proponents that many nations of the world have embraced to explain the existence and essence of things may fall into this category.

*you see how the “sky and earth” fled before the great throne. Does earth have leg to run? Does sky have wings to fly away? Again in that Revelation 20:9-15; “death and grave” were thrown into the lake of. Can death and grace be handled? Isn’t this a pointer to the fact that many of thing are allegorical? How do you burn grave and death in a literal lake of fire?

What’s this lake of fire?

*There was an actual lake of fire that sulfur was added to constantly in the time of Christ and the Apostles.
There was a valley just outside the big walls of Jerusalem. It was a huge dump site. Rubbish and sometimes criminals that have been executed that people deem not to deserve burial were thrown in to it to dispose off them. There was a fire that constantly burn at this site because sulfur was constantly poured on it. The name of this lake is Gehenna.
Sometimes when Jesus said things like “somebody that hate his brother will be throne into “hell”, the word the Bible translators of the Bible translate as hell is Gehenna. It’s that burning lake (valley) Jesus was using to describe the destruction such person will face. Jesus explicitly use Gehenna.
In this lake too, worms feast on the decomposing body. You can imagine the horror of the face. There apparently are some bodies that flies perch on and lay there maggots on. The Bible describe this maggots that they never die, that can mean you will always find them slithering on the decomposing corpse.

**what’s more? Revelation 21:8; explains what this lake of fire represent. I will quote your version. “their doom is in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur. THIS IS THE SECOND DEATH." The lake represents the second death, which is the permanent death, a death without hope of resurrection. Permanent destruction and forfeiture of the gift of God that is eternal life (or forever existence). That is why death and grave too can be said to be thrown into this lake, because around that time that sinners are thrown into that figurative fire and made to cease to exist, death too will be no more. Nobody will die again and the use of graves will go extinct.

Yes, somebody can use USA and 9ja as two different things to show 2 contrasting realties. There can be a proverb in a place were somebody say things like “eh, David, we wey support APC na for America we dey live oh, the government are showing us a lot of favor, while you guys that are rebellious to Tinubu are the one living in 9ja. You are being deprived of several subsidies the government offers ( this is just an example you know, it’s not the exact description of things in Nigeria).

guy you know deceivers like jam-talk, which is what you are doing here
Lake of fire being the second death, is not a metaphor, a description/definition/explanation is not a metaphor. Just look at the bunch of IRRELEVANT volumous twarp you, all you have had to do WAS TO SHOW HOW IT'S A METAPHOR AND STATE IT'S DIFFERENT MEANING.

At least have the shame to admit you were wrong. THERE WAS NOT ONE THING YOU WROTE THERE THAT CLEARLY ADDRESSES THE SUBJECT OF CONVERSATION, lake of fire being a metaphor, I don't care about wild beasts or bush fowls, don't care about anything else that you do not relate to the lake of fire being a metaphor and not a literally place they get thrown into like you original stated

thinkmoney:
NIV too doesn’t translate a lot of places well. I can show you three more errors in NIV and I am sure you take time to verify things that are new to you.
Did NIV even use anything like signify ? It just went on and say “made it known”.
I can show you three more errors, one is even just a position of punctuation mark in a sentence. Yes, such subtle insignificant things can change the whole meaning of a message.
I don’t want to do it now as it will open more fronts. This one we are dealing with is already overwhelming. Do I am going to focus on replying to that your long comment

so after telling me to wait let you find time, this is the best you could come up with. An irrelevant mention of possible errors in a Bible translation not related to the topic at hand where I clearly stated the Greek text and wrote out the interpretations of a verse you incorrectly attempted to use to justify your statement that "burning fire" as used in Rev. 19,20&21 is a metaphor.

Wow

Truthseeker10:
🤣🤣🤣na wa....so the bible says that wild beast was literally tormented, You mean God tormented an animal in the lake of fire?


hell and death were also literally tormented? You mean that death and hell can feel pains of torment?
Na wa oo🤣🤣

The ones in Revelation 20:9 please show me where they went to after fire consumed them. Show me where they were literally tormented in the lake of fire.

bro you still don't know how to read o. Is that where the story ended or was that the only verse I quoted? 🤣 bro only an semi-illiterate would read an answer and ask a question where is the answer but I am no surprised is it not you again.

Truthseeker10 you want me to start with you and again and school you in the basics of common sense, problem is you will not still learn.

Anyway hope you take the roasted wild beast meat that you are seeing and stuff your mouth with it o 🤣😂🤣🤣😂

Below is a recent example

https://www.nairaland.com/8578589/how-political-power-empire-helped#137812632