₦airaland Forum

That's a lie. Faith WORKING through love is what we need, not mere faith.

If you were correct, the Bible would not have said: of faith, hope and love, the greatest is LOVE!

*ignoring the insults*

Anyone else can help if you so please. Thank you.

Lol

Pls what is in the comic, I can't see it on my phone.

Lol, so you're still in this cartoon business. Anyway,,

Look closely, even the guy in the picture is doing a WORK.

He's carrying the radio on his shoulder as he walks along.

The good wine Jesus created was just like the good wine "everyman usually set forth at the beginning". The difference is that other people would bring worse wine when people were drunk presuming that they wouldn't know the difference, but Jesus ensures that good wine was still being brought forth even after men were drunk.

So its either the good wine @ d beginning and the good wine "created" by Jesus were both alcoholic, or they were both non-alcoholic.

And non-alcoholic wine cannot make men well-drunk. Thank you.

@ Madam Plappville, here are 1,000,000 Bible verses that support infant baptism, since you are so keen on 'scripture'

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.

Job 14:1-4 - man that is born of woman is full of trouble and unclean. Baptism is required for all human beings because of our sinful human nature.

Psalm 51:5 - we are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the necessity of baptism from conception.

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.

Acts 16:15 - 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.

Acts 16:30-33 - it was only the adults who were candidates for baptism that had to profess a belief in Jesus. This is consistent with the Church's practice of instructing catechumens before baptism. But this verse does not support a "believer's baptism" requirement for everyone. See Acts 16:15,33. The earlier one comes to baptism, the better. For those who come to baptism as adults, the Church has always required them to profess their belief in Christ. For babies who come to baptism, the Church has always required the parents to profess the belief in Christ on behalf of the baby. But there is nothing in the Scriptures about a requirement for ALL baptism candidates to profess their own belief in Christ (because the Church has baptized babies for 2,000 years).

Acts 16:33 - Paul baptized the jailer (an adult) and his entire household (which had to include children). Baptism is never limited to adults and those of the age of reason. See also Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 1 Cor. 1:16; and 1 Tim. 3:12; Gen. 31:41; 36:6; 41:51; Joshua 24:15; 2 Sam. 7:11, 1 Chron. 10:6 which shows “oikos” generally includes children.

Rom. 5:12 - sin came through Adam and death through sin. Babies' souls are affected by Adam's sin and need baptism just like adult souls.

Rom. 5:15 - the grace of Jesus Christ surpasses that of the Old Covenant. So children can also enter the new Covenant in baptism. From a Jewish perspective, it would have been unthinkable to exclude infants and children from God's Covenant kingdom.

1 Cor. 1:16 - Paul baptized the household ("oikos" of Stephanus. Baptism is not limited to adults.

Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:2 - Paul addresses the "saints" of the Church, and these include the children he addresses in Eph. 6:1 and Col. 3:20. Children become saints of the Church only through baptism.

Eph. 2:3 - we are all by nature children of wrath, in sin, like all mankind. Infants are no exception. See also Psalm 51:5 and Job 14:1-4 which teach us we are conceived in sin and born unclean.

2 Thess. 3:10 - if anyone does not work let him not eat. But this implies that those who are unable to work should still be able to eat. Babies should not starve because they are unable to work, and should also not be denied baptism because they are unable to make a declaration of faith.

Matt. 9:2; Mark 2:3-5 - the faith of those who brought in the paralytic cured the paralytic's sins. This is an example of the forgiveness of sins based on another's faith, just like infant baptism. The infant child is forgiven of sin based on the parents' faith.

Matt. 8:5-13 - the servant is healed based upon the centurion's faith. This is another example of healing based on another's faith. If Jesus can heal us based on someone else’s faith, then He can baptize us based on someone else’s faith as well.

Mark 9:22-25 - Jesus exercises the child's unclean spirit based on the father's faith. This healing is again based on another's faith.

1 Cor. 7:14 – Paul says that children are sanctified by God through the belief of only one of their parents.

Exodus 12:24-28 - the Passover was based on the parent's faith. If they did not kill and eat the lamb, their first-born child died.

Joshua 5:2-7 - God punished Israel because the people had not circumcised their children. This was based on the parent's faith. The parents play a critical role in their child's salvation.


Now can you tell me one verse in the Bible that says infants should not be baptized?

May the Lord have mercy on your soul. Amen.

proo212:
Please I am no hater, I am just stating what is not biblical. I went to a catholic school so i know what i am talking about. Recently I went to a catholic church as a friend was getting married. Why do I have to sing to mary?

That I may know Him and power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His suffering being made conformable unto His death.

Looking unto Jesus {and no one else (my emphasis)} the author and finisher of our faith who for the joy of what was set before him endured the cross despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Now I ask you, Do you believe the Bible is the complete word of God?

If yes, why have we added to what is in it?

Thank God you went to a Catholic Church. So tell us:

Did anyone force you or anyone else to sing to Mary?

What was being sung to her? Were they singing "You are our God, we worship you"?

What prayers were said during the Mass and in whose name were they said?

If men sing to women all the time eg 2face singing to "all the African Queens", what is wrong with us singing to the Mother of our Lord?

And to answer your question, the Apostle John said not everything that happened is written in the Bible. Are you okay?

"You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?"--James 2:20

Hater! We mainly focus on Jesus. We go to receive him @ every mass, everyday since the last supper 2011 years ago, And Jesus in holy communion is the centre of the mass, And the mass is the focal point Catholic worship.

@Joagbaje, I don't think anyone really expects you to say you see a difference between the 'prosperity gospel' of today and Christ's message of self-denial and long-suffering.

More details,

nlMediator:
The proof is simple common sense that God gave to all of us. If you choose to believe that the Roman soldiers, after breaking the legs of the thieves, took them down before death and went looking for panic-stricken Christians who went into hiding to come and baptize the 'good thief' before death, that’s your call. I do not. More important, Jesus could have said: “You’ll be with me in paradise provided you get baptized.” He did not. Since the thief probably was not there in John 3 when Jesus mentioned the necessity of water for salvation, wouldn’t it have been better for Jesus to inform him of baptism, with a note that without it, there is no paradise?

5solas:
Very sound post.

You guys have still not given proof that the good thief wasn't baptized throughout nis lifetime. Couldn't he have been baptized before the cross? In which case Jesus would have no need to mention 'baptism' to him at the time.

Now I'm not saying categorically that he was baptized, I'm saying we have no way of knowing. And its good to shut up about things you don't know or at least not sound so certain about the uncertain.

nlMediator:
The proof is simple common sense that God gave to all of us. If you choose to believe that the Roman soldiers, after breaking the legs of the thieves, took them down before death and went looking for panic-stricken Christians who went into hiding to come and baptize the 'good thief' before death, that’s your call. I do not. More important, Jesus could have said: “You’ll be with me in paradise provided you get baptized.” He did not. Since the thief probably was not there in John 3 when Jesus mentioned the necessity of water for salvation, wouldn’t it have been better for Jesus to inform him of baptism, with a note that without it, there is no paradise?

5solas:
Very sound post.

You guys have still not given proof that the good thief wasn't baptized throughout nis lifetime. Couldn't he have been baptized before the cross? In which case Jesus would have no need to mention 'baptism' to him at the time.

Now I'm not saying categorically that he was baptized, I'm saying we have no way of knowing. And its good to shut up about things you don't know or at least not sound so certain about the uncertain.

@plappville,

You don't realize you and the OP are saying different things, infact opposite.

@sweetnecta,

Yes. You believe Jesus said "my God, my God, why have you forsaken me", but you don't believe that he said he was the Son of God. But both come from the Bible which you discredit. Isn't that hypocrisy?

Besides, you don't know what he meant by 'my God, my God, why have you forsaken me'. You can't understand the Bible because it wasn't addressed to you.

And when you don't know something, the sane thing to do is to swallow your misguided pride, admit you don't know and ask those who know, instead of spewing meaningless lines.

With all due respect, but I think the problem sometimes is not knowledge of the Bible but knowledge of grammar.

It's little use arguing when someone/some people cannot even grasp simple statements in the language we are arguing in.

For example: if someone cannot understand the meaning of 'WORK OUT your salvation', how can he understand 'EXCEPT A MAN IS BORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT, HE CANNOT ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN'?

Even though I have a better answer for you, let me take an easy route. Do you have any proof that 'the good thief' wasn't baptized?

@olabowale

Mohammed saw Jesus as a prophet of God, right? Let's assume for a moment that its true. So we are supposed to believe every word a prophet of God says, right?

So we believe everything Jesus told us, what's your problem with that?

But Jesus didn't tell anybody to write anything and he didn't mention anything about the Bible. The Bible was created by the Catholic Church so why are you reading it?

@frosbel,

The copts have similar practices with Catholics like veneration of Mary, monasticism etc, some of them are even in full communion with the Pope so why do you call them Christians? I thought you said the Catholic Church was a demonic cult.

@frosbel,

The copts have similar practices with Catholics like veneration of Mary, monasticism etc, some of them are even in full communion with the Pope so why do you call them Christians? I thought you said the Catholic Church was a demonic cult.

Do not be deceived, there's only one church in the Bible. Even when it says "churches", they are still one and the same, teaching the same doctrine alligned to the same origin. Not different churches with different doctrines and different founders. There's only one church. Find it.

If Catholicism is devilish, why not just be a part of one of the other 35000 christian shops. At the end of time we'll find out which church Jesus founded and which ones men founded.

Well I'm "conc Catholic" like you call it and its not shocking at all. I don't need a website to know who we worship in church everyday. Besides, did you think the world would say good things about the church that Jesus founded? What did they say about the Master himself? If Jesus were not with the Church as he promised he would be, don't you think it would have been destroyed by now?

And what do you mean by Catholic/Lutheran? Make up your mind. TRUTH or UNTRUTH! A Church founded by JESUS or MARTIN LUTHER! You decide.

In your opinion.

What's happening here? What are they actually talking about?

If only one person will answer my question directly. More like a 'yes' or 'no'.

Of course, only idiots would drink from the lagoon. I'm not one of you.

thehomer:
Just back from the lagoon. It tasted just like God.

oh! so you know how he tastes. Why the foolish questions then?

@sweetnecta,

Did God speak Arabic to Mohammed?

If he didn't, why was the Quran written in Arabic?

If he did, then couldn't the Holy Spirit have inspired the authors of the new testament in Greek?

Besides, I'd rather trust eye-witness on what they say, no matter the language in which they say it than someone who sleeps and wakes up and says he had a revelation.