I quoted Augustine to prove he made no changes to the essence of apostolic teaching. You keep making false assertions with no quotes and no evidence.
What would be the point of quoting the ECF when you reject Augustine's quotes that proved you wrong? The ECF wrote truckloads on baptism, and agreed unanimously, but do you agree with any of them? Augustine was an ECF, that you say I didn't quote. You're not making sense. For the second time, the early church did not know the fate of the souls of unbaptized babies because it had not been divinely revealed. These things take centuries of discernment.
Because my 2 short quotes proved you wrong, and you can't take the time to refute it because it can't be done.
Your blanket judgment of "most Catholics" is as pathetic as your take on Augustine.
Perhaps I am. The Church is Christ on earth; you fall in love with her or you don't. That goes for lapsed Catholics who have every opportunity to have a profound relationship with Jesus Christ, but don't. Blaming the Church for that is just laziness.
I can't answer to you E,,,because you TOTALLY did not address my post.
As to Augustine,,,,I did say ECFs, of which he is not one.
Some theologians will accept that the ECFs go up to about 400 or even 600...
MOST will stop at 325 because that's when the church began to CHANGE.
I make sense...if you care to read my post to you again...it's below....
I can prove anything to you BUT you should really reply to what I'm saying.
I can't spend time telling you HOW you misunderstood me...I'd rather deal with the facts and not telling you how you misunderstood.
Here is your post no. 720 which DOES NOT REPLY to my post...
Oh, and PLEASE stop telling me how I learned about Catholicism by liberal protestants.
This is an interesting concept....actually I learned from the catholic church in very recent times...I could tell you how and why if you like,,,but I don't know what difference it makes. How do YOU know catholic doctrine since you seem to still be living in the times of Trent?
post 720...
BLUE IS MINE.
↑
No, it does not WHAT?
It does not go beyond the reasons of the early church.
Augustine developed what was already there.
OK.
Original Sin always existed.
Was it taught by the CC that one was personally RESPONSIBLE for O.S?
Never. Original sin is inherited from Adam and Eve, it is not committed by a conscious choice, therefore it can be removed without a conscious choice.
Was it taught by the CC that even a baby went to hell if he was not baptized because of this O.S.?
In the early centuries, the Church did not know the fate of unbaptized babies because it had not been divinely revealed. Now, the Church commends them to the mercy and care of God. The Church has NEVER said who is in hell and who isn't.
Perhaps you could quote an ECF that said babies went TO HELL if they were not baptized? This would be BEFORE 325 AD and definitely before Augustine, who changed a lot about the CC and none of which I agree with.
Why don't you quote Augustine where he departed from the original essence of apostolic teaching, instead of making things up.
Sorry, but I'm done reading Augustine.
Why? Because you have been proven wrong?
He messed up the church badly, very badly with all his unorthodox beliefs.
Why don't you quote Augustine where he departed from the original essence of apostolic teaching, instead of making things up.
As I've requested, WE BOTH KNOW that Augustine CHANGED the church teaching on baptism...you'll have to post something PRE 325 AD.
Development does not mean "change". Augustine did not "change" anything, and you cannot, and have not, proven otherwise.
Right.
There's change.
But there's no change.
I got it.
No, you haven't "got it" at all. Development does not mean "change". It's straightforward denial on your part.
And really, don't post links to me about what the CC teaches.
Not for anything...but I DO believe I know what it teaches.
You believe you know without looking, by your own admission. That's called prejudice.
[the above is soooo funny, I have to restrain myself]
Most of what you know about Catholicism has been taught to you by liberal Protestants who divide and separate from their own reformers. Links are a valuable tool for explaining Catholicism, because it cannot be adequately expressed by sound bytes, carnival barkers, bumper stickers and T shirts, or even forums. It requires honest investigation and study. These things are anathema to anti-Catholics.
[
I'm an anti-Catholic?
]