What is the purpose of infant baptism?

[BreadOfLife]

No. I wouldn't expect to see one, either. As to apostles still walking the earth, we can't know how many, if any, were still alive (never mind ambulatory). Nor does it matter. The Didache section on ecclesiastical practices -- probably the last section written -- does not depend on apostolic imprimaturs for its validity.

Ummmm, the document is called, The Teachings of the Twlve Apostes or The Doctrine of the twelve Apostles.
And YOU don't think they had anything to do with it?
Why are there ZERO rebuttals to this document?

Surely, the surviving Apostled would have condemned this wirj if it was NOT orthodox teaching.

 

[RedFan]

Peter was one of them.
There were 5 important regions and each one had a head/an authority so that the bishops could be guided correctly.
Much like the CC today.

Each area had Bishops, so the head had to be called something else, and the word used was Pope.
Papa....like father, and the office was called Ponteficato and he Pontefiche. Which means bridge --- the bridge between us and heaven.

The areas were:
Alexandria
Constantinople
Rome
Jerusalem
Antioch

I believe it was in the 5th century that one of the Bishops first used the term Pope as meaning the ONE POPE, as we have today.

I'm sure this is all available on the internet....

Once the term POPE became popular and accepted....all the Bishops of Rome became known as Pope (the One Pope as established in the 5th century -- not sure about this date)

I'm familiar with usage of "Pope" to refer to metropolitan bishops in the first three centuries -- but utterly unfamiliar with any bishop of Alexandria or Constantinople ever once communicating with Peter. Can you fill in some details?

 

[BreadOfLife]

In your opinion, just like the opinion of the Roman Catholic Church, you think in the name of the son is son.
It is clear to me that not a single one of you guys know what the name of the son is per Matthew 28:19.
Instead, you deflect and say, in the authority of, in the authority of, in the authority of,…
Nameless authority is what you guys teach.

You’re either a liar – or justr REALLY stupid because I already told you His name.
I think it’s a little pf BOTH . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

More Internet, fake news from fake ancient fathers. None of these people were early church fathers. They were the wolves that Paul spoke about that would come after he was gone in Acts chapter 20. They were all reprobates that were heading in the direction of becoming the Roman Catholic Church in the fourth century A.D.

Ahhhh, yes – the old, “I CAN’T argue with that so it’s NOT true!” defense.
Pretty pathetic – even for a Biblical and historical lightweight like YOU . . .

MOST of the Church Fathers in the first 3 centuries were martyred for their faith in Christ.
Not bad for a bunch of “reprobates” . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Highly doubt you KNOW the “understanding” of “the People” who lived in the FIRST century.

I already PROVED in my last post that they understiid indeed what "in the name of" meant.

Your opinion of me is nothing moire than something stuck to the bottom of my shoe . . .

 

[GodsGrace]

I'm familiar with usage of "Pope" to refer to metropolitan bishops in the first three centuries -- but utterly unfamiliar with any bishop of Alexandria or Constantinople ever once communicating with Peter. Can you fill in some details?

Gosh RedFan
I had done a small study on this a few years ago because Peter was never referred to as Pope in the early writings.
Not ALL metropolitan Bishops were referred to as Pope....
Just the 5 main ones of the cities I posted.

I'm not saying that the Bishop/Pope of Alexandria or Constantinople ever actually communicated with Peter in Rome.
I do know for sure that when something questionable arouse, the other Bishops/popes (4 of them excluding Peter) DID turn to him for advice and/or a decision.

This was so interesting for me when I read about it.
Wish I could remember where - I'm sure you'll find it on the net.

Not sure if you're Catholic.....but the CC wants to call Peter the first Pope....who am I to argue?
It's kind of like the Super Bowl.
It didn't used to be called that, but since the first time that it was, we now call all the championship games going back as the Super Bowl.
It's the same.

I don't have any problem with calling Peter the first Pope,,,,but it's not really historically accurate.

The reason I DON'T have a problem with it is because Peter was considered to be the head of the early church...
so - call him what you will.

 

[GodsGrace]

Ahhhh, yes – the old, “I CAN’T argue with that so it’s NOT true!” defense.
Pretty pathetic – even for a Biblical and historical lightweight like YOU . . .

MOST of the Church Fathers in the first 3 centuries were martyred for their faith in Christ.
Not bad for a bunch of “reprobates” . . .

Ignatius of Antioch is probably my favorite.
He wrote his letters on the way to Rome to be martyred --- fed to the lions.

Who of us would be willing to do this today?
Those who want to ignore history are missing a great deal of the beauty of their Christianity.
Their loss.

Ignatius of Antioch (/ɪɡˈneɪʃəs/; Greek: Ἰγνάτιος Ἀντιοχείας, translit. Ignátios Antiokheías; died c. 108/140 AD),[2][3][7][8][9] also known as Ignatius Theophorus (Ἰγνάτιος ὁ Θεοφόρος, Ignátios ho Theophóros, 'the God-bearing'), was an early Christian writer and Patriarch of Antioch. While en route to Rome, where he met his martyrdom, Ignatius wrote a series of letters. This correspondence forms a central part of a later collection of works by the Apostolic Fathers. He is considered one of the three most important of these, together with Clement of Rome and Polycarp. His letters also serve as an example of early Christian theology, and address important topics including ecclesiology, the sacraments, and the role of bishops.

source: Ignatius of Antioch - Wikipedia

 

[Truther]

So, the single word "Jesus" is or isn't a sufficient baptismal utterance?

Jesus must be spoken. That’s how we identify with the burial of Jesus. If we don’t say the name of Jesus when we are being immersed, we are just getting wet. You have to say the name to identify with the savior.

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

 

[Truther]

You’re either a liar – or justr REALLY stupid because I already told you His name.
I think it’s a little pf BOTH . . .

I think that I am smarter than you. I realize a long time ago that the name of the son per Matthew 28:19 is Jesus. You still think the name of the son is son. That is why you guys baptize in the name of the son, and not in the name of Jesus.

 

[Truther]

Ahhhh, yes – the old, “I CAN’T argue with that so it’s NOT true!” defense.
Pretty pathetic – even for a Biblical and historical lightweight like YOU . . .

MOST of the Church Fathers in the first 3 centuries were martyred for their faith in Christ.
Not bad for a bunch of “reprobates” . . .

Just like a Catholic. You believe everything you’re told and everything you read and everything you hear. That is why you guys are into talking and bleeding statues, etc.

 

[RedFan]

I'm not saying that the Bishop/Pope of Alexandria or Constantinople ever actually communicated with Peter in Rome.
I do know for sure that when something questionable arouse, the other Bishops/popes (4 of them excluding Peter) DID turn to him for advice and/or a decision.

This was so interesting for me when I read about it.
Wish I could remember where - I'm sure you'll find it on the net.

I looked, but couldn't find anything. It's fascinating to me that this type of consultation may have occurred. Wish you could remember!

I believe Peter appointed the bishop in Antioch during his travels. In Jerusalem, James was the leader, so let's call him the local bishop/pope -- and surely he and Peter consulted on things. Legend has it that Mark founded the Christian community in Alexandria, but definitive proof is sparse. As to the Church in Constantinople, it counts Andrew as its founder, but again, definitive proof is sparse. In any event, if there were disagreements that needed Peter's guidance to resolve (maybe "needed" is too strong here), I suspect Peter was dead by circa 65, when the churches in Alexandria and Constantinople were fledgling at best.

 

[RedFan]

Jesus must be spoken. That’s how we identify with the burial of Jesus. If we don’t say the name of Jesus when we are being immersed, we are just getting wet. You have to say the name to identify with the savior.

So "Christ" can be dispensed with?

 

[GodsGrace]

I looked, but couldn't find anything. It's fascinating to me that this type of consultation may have occurred. Wish you could remember!

I believe Peter appointed the bishop in Antioch during his travels. In Jerusalem, James was the leader, so let's call him the local bishop/pope -- and surely he and Peter consulted on things. Legend has it that Mark founded the Christian community in Alexandria, but definitive proof is sparse. As to the Church in Constantinople, it counts Andrew as its founder, but again, definitive proof is sparse. In any event, if there were disagreements that needed Peter's guidance to resolve (maybe "needed" is too strong here), I suspect Peter was dead by circa 65, when the churches in Alexandria and Constantinople were fledgling at best.

Late here.
Will try to find something tomorrow.
I don't think Mark or Andrew were Popes.
I do believe James was...
'Night

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

I looked, but couldn't find anything. It's fascinating to me that this type of consultation may have occurred. Wish you could remember!

I believe Peter appointed the bishop in Antioch during his travels. In Jerusalem, James was the leader, so let's call him the local bishop/pope -- and surely he and Peter consulted on things. Legend has it that Mark founded the Christian community in Alexandria, but definitive proof is sparse. As to the Church in Constantinople, it counts Andrew as its founder, but again, definitive proof is sparse. In any event, if there were disagreements that needed Peter's guidance to resolve (maybe "needed" is too strong here), I suspect Peter was dead by circa 65, when the churches in Alexandria and Constantinople were fledgling at best.

To those who believe, evidence is of secondary importance. To those who refuse to believe, no amount of evidence will suffice.

 

[RedFan]

Late here.
Will try to find something tomorrow.
I don't think Mark or Andrew were Popes.
I do believe James was...
'Night

Buona notte.

 

[RedFan]

To those who believe, evidence is of secondary importance. To those who refuse to believe, no amount of evidence will suffice.

As to the fundamental message of Christianity, absolutely correct!

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

Just like a Catholic. You believe everything you’re told and everything you read and everything you hear. That is why you guys are into talking and bleeding statues, etc.

Just like an anti-Catholic. You believe everything you’re told and everything you read and everything you hear, that puts the historic Church in the darkest light possible. Your degree of anti-Catholicism is a mental illness, hopelessly addicted to conflict and lies.

 

[Truther]

So "Christ" can be dispensed with?

I use it

 

[Jude Thaddeus]

As to the fundamental message of Christianity, absolutely correct!

OK, so what about the theological deviations from mainline Protestantism? A no water baptism is so absurd, they are not worth replies. I'm putting all of them on ignore, including the Acts 2:38 Lavrovites, that denies Matthew 28:19.