Because there's many masters of the scripture and Jesus say, "Leave em be, if the blind leads the blind, aren't they soon going to fall into a ditch?"
What is the purpose of infant baptism?
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What do people mean by ROME?
Rome was the head of the church at that time.
Peter was the Bishop of Rome after Jesus ascension, and it's known that Rome was looked to for advice and guidance because Peter
took on the role as leader of the church by consensus.
Which probably happened because Jesus saw that in Peter, there was a leadership quality.
I thought a lot about the Last Supper.
I used to think that when Jesus said (about the bread) THIS IS MY BODY,,,,that He wasn't literally holding His body in His hands.
But the very next day He went to the cross where HIS BODY was BROKEN for us,,,,just like He broke the bread.
I've come to associate the Last Supper with the Cross.
I think I posted on this thread that when Jesus was with the 2 disciples on the Road to Emmaus, they recognized it was Him when He broke the bread.
I'm just trying to put everything together.
I used to think exactly like you so I understand your POV.
What faith am I?
Maybe you could advise me.
What do you disagree with?
At some point in time, it was decided to gather the writings that would go into the NT.
At some point in time it was decided that maybe all the important writings should go into one book
so it could be referred to in the future when all the early fathers would no longer be around.
Where do we disgree?
So the RCC is smarter than Peter, Paul etc for not commanding or practicing baptism in the name of Jesus Christ?
Jesus actually commanded them to baptize in the titles, father son, and Holy Ghost, without a single name mentioned?
Do you know what I think? I think Peter, who was there in the book of Matthew chapter 28, knew that the name of the son that Jesus was talking about baptizing in, was Jesus. He was actually smarter than you guys. I bet the rest of the disciples thought the same thing. You know why I think that? Because nobody in the New Testament church was baptized any other way, but in the name of Jesus.
Father and Holy Ghost were never alluded to in any baptism formulas. I think they knew something you don’t.
The Roman Catholic Church is the tool of Satan to enforce false doctrine over Christianity en masse. They did it physically and now they do it spiritually. There is a great dark cloud that shrouds them and blinds their constituents from the truth. Most of what they teach even bleed over into the rest of Christendom . Almost every belief system in Christianity is laced with some Ungodly doctrine that originated from the Roman Catholic Church. Like tithing, for example.
I was once a Catholic and somebody showed me Acts 2:38. I owe it to my fellow man to let them know what somebody showed me.
No, he actually obeyed the command in Matthew chapter 28. To the letter. He knew the name of the father son and Holy Ghost is Jesus…
Lesson 6- Pages 4-5
I made this video to explain it
Believe what you will Truther.
I can't continue with this like some on this thread.
I'll leave you with this:
The Wedding at Cana....
Mary said:
WHATEVER HE SAYS TO YOU, DO IT.
John 2:5
Like I said (maybe not to you)
I tend to obey what JESUS stated.
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Matt. 16:19 "I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Jesus to Peter)
Luke 10:16 "Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.” (Jesus to the Apostles)
If we listen to Peter and those appointed to his office, and if we listen to the Apostles and those appointed to take their place, then we listen to Jesus.
Nice Truther!
Nice voice....you sound like a good guy.
You DO state that they will receive forgiveness of sins and the Holy Ghost.
Which would be the difference between the baptism of John and that of Jesus,
as I've posted to you.
It's this NAME thing that has you confused (excuse me, but I think you are).
FATHER is a NAME because it's an office.
SON is a NAME because it's AN OFFICE.....just like Father is and just like Holy Spirit is.
HOLY SPIRIT is a NAME because it's an office.
So, in your way of thinking:
What's the NAME of the Father?
What's the NAME of the Holy Spirit?
IN THE NAME OF just means in the AUTHORITY of....
We come in the NAME OF THE KING....
THE KING IS AN OFFICE.
I can't do better than this and it doesn't matter.
You're steeped in your belief and that's how you'll remain.
I don't see this as a big problem.
PS. The Holy Spirit is THE COMFORTER
Just like Jesus is THE SON
BUT IT'S NOT A NAME.
It's an OFFICE.
Jude Thaddeus
Active Member
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Have you noticed a general trend (of course there are exceptions to the rule), that Protestants who convert to Catholicism are usually grateful and happy, and do so through deeper intellectual study, etc.? And Catholics who leave the faith to become Protestant or atheists are usually bitter, and usually leave because they never really knew the faith?
Jude Thaddeus
Active Member
Yes, I notice in all the conversion stories, none of them bash their former faith, but find their former faith is not supplanted, but embellished.
Have you noticed a general trend (of course there are exceptions to the rule), that Catholics who convert to Protestantism are usually grateful and happy, and do so through deeper intellectual study, etc.? And Protestants who leave the faith to become Catholic or atheists are usually bitter, and usually leave because they never really knew the faith?
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
I sometimes wonder if the bitterness is caused by knowing, inside, that they made a mistake? And now, they have to rationalize their actions. The most anti-Catholics I've found are Catholics who have abandoned their faith. And almost without exception, they were ignorant of what the Catholic Church taught and is.
No, quite the opposite. Take a look at all the conversion stories, including many Protestant pastors and seminary educators, who have converted to Catholcism in the link that Jude Thaddeus posted above: Conversion Stories Archives - The Coming Home Network Many are very well educated men, having higher degrees in Bible studies from well-known Protestant universities. I don't see a likewise trend among priests becoming Protestants.
Jude Thaddeus
Active Member
No, what I have noticed is that DEAD Catholics who convert to Protestantism become anti-Catholics. (of course there are exceptions to the rule). Then they blame the Catholic Church for their deadness.
Augustin56
Well-Known Member
Similar threads
