Electing New Pope

  • 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!

Philip James

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
4,275
3,091
113
Brandon
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Catholicism has faith/trust in church and sacraments INSTEAD OF IN CHRIST

That is a lie. Christ pours out His life on us through the Sacraments.

And so has the Church believed and taught for 2000 years..

Where is the 2000 year old apostolic community that says otherwise?

'Every planting not of My Father shall be uprooted'

As for the wedding feast, those who participate unworthily will be rejected, eating and drinking condemnation on themselves..

Pax et Bonum
 

Blue Dragonfly's

Well-Known Member
Jul 15, 2022
1,190
582
113
not this Christian parody site
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
You gave me 2 entire chapters of Scripture.
Can you whittle it down to specific text to present your argument?

The question was:
Can you show me ANY place in ALL of Scripture where “Faith alone”(Sola Fide) is advocated?
I believe context is vital to understanding any topic in Exegesis.
Which is why I believe the answers to your question are in those chapters.

Cutting a passage out of a book in the Bible so to sustain a broad argument because that passage may contain similar words to the arguments point I don't believe is proper method.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I believe context is vital to understanding any topic in Exegesis.
Which is why I believe the answers to your question are in those chapters.

Cutting a passage out of a book in the Bible so to sustain a broad argument because that passage may contain similar words to the arguments point I don't believe is proper method.
That’s fine.

HOWEVER – in a debate, the onus is on YOU to encapsulate long passages of text and form them intoa cohesive argument for your position You don’t just tell someone to read TWO entire chapters of Scripture.

If your position is CLEAR to you within the text – then explain WHY.
 

Blue Dragonfly's

Well-Known Member
Jul 15, 2022
1,190
582
113
not this Christian parody site
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
No.

Back in post #272 - I asked YOU if you knew how Protestants got their OT Canon - and you have YET to give me an answer.
WHY would I answer my own question without hearing from YOU first? This is a coonversation - not a sermon.

If you don't kow the answer - just admit it and I'll explain.
I'll waith for your answer about the OT Canon first.
I'm going to abandon your efforts here now. Because it does not appear you are aware of your own post that you refer to there. It was you who first asked me, ''Do you know where Protestants got their OT Canon?''

I responded, do tell.
You have subsequently and repeatedly demonstrated you cannot. Even when I made my prior 'do tell' invitation into a question to very clearly ask if you do know where Protestants got their OT Canon?

You are now not only unable to answer your own prior question, again, but are now implying I have that burden. When you introduced the Canon history.
When you don't know the history, else you wouldn't dodge the invitation to share it all these many posts, just admit it.
And then proceed to educate yourself by accessing credible resources to obtain that understanding.
I wish you the best in that pursuit should you choose that undertaking.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'm going to abandon your efforts here now. Because it does not appear you are aware of your own post that you refer to there. It was you who first asked me, ''Do you know where Protestants got their OT Canon?''

I responded, do tell.
You have subsequently and repeatedly demonstrated you cannot. Even when I made my prior 'do tell' invitation into a question to very clearly ask if you do know where Protestants got their OT Canon?

You are now not only unable to answer your own prior question, again, but are now implying I have that burden. When you introduced the Canonhistory.
When you don't know the history, else you wouldn't dodge the invitation to share it all these many posts, just admit it.
And then proceed to educate yourself by accessing credible resources to obtain that understanding.
I wish you the best in that pursuit should you choose that undertaking.
Actually – that’s a LIE.
I’ve explained it TWICE to other posters on this thread. The reason I haven’t explained it to YOU is because of your evasiveness with regard to my earlier question.

YOUR
problem is that you CANNOT substantiate Sola Scriptura – and THIS is your way out. I’m NOT going to let you do that, so here is how YOU and your Protestant brothers got your OT Canon of Scripture:

After the destruction of Jerusalem, a group of Rabbis established a rabbinical school in the Jewish city of at Jabneh (or Jamnia). It became center for Jewish political and religious thought. Because the Temple had been destroyed in 70 AD – this school led by Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph (A.D. 37-137) redefined certain aspects of Judaism until the Temple could be restored.
One of the things discussed was use of the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) by early Christians.

At this gathering, they decided to eject 7 Books (and portions of Esther and Daniel) that they felt were “uninspired”. They provided a new Greek translation because the early Christians were converting the Jews using the Septuagint, which was compiled about 200 years before the birth of Christ. According to historical sources, the rabbinical gathering at Jabneh was not even an "official" council with binding authority to make such a decision. It can be clearly shown that Jesus and the Apostles studied and quoted from these 7 Books. In the New Testament, we see almost 200 references to them.

The main advocate for removing the 7 Deuterocanonical Books was Rabbi Akiba, who was also known for proclaiming that a man named Simon Bar Kokhba was the “real” Messiah during the 2nd Jewish Revolt (circa 132 AD). It was during THIS time that the Jewish Canon which had still been an OPEN Canon during the life of Christ was finally closed.

So, YOUR Protestant Fathers chose to go with a POST-Christ, POST-Temple Canon of Scripture that was declared by a FALSE Prophet (Akiva) who proclaimed a FALSE “Christ” (Kokhba).

This is who YOU have chosen to follow instead of Christ’s Church, on whom He bestowed supreme earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23), to whom He compared His very SELF (Acts 9:4-5), whom Scripture called the FULLNESS of Him (Eph. 1:22-23) and the Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).

There
– now I want YOU to give me answers to MY questions.
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I'm going to abandon your efforts here now. Because it does not appear you are aware of your own post that you refer to there. It was you who first asked me, ''Do you know where Protestants got their OT Canon?''

I responded, do tell.
You have subsequently and repeatedly demonstrated you cannot. Even when I made my prior 'do tell' invitation into a question to very clearly ask if you do know where Protestants got their OT Canon?

You are now not only unable to answer your own prior question, again, but are now implying I have that burden. When you introduced the Canon history.
When you don't know the history, else you wouldn't dodge the invitation to share it all these many posts, just admit it.
And then proceed to educate yourself by accessing credible resources to obtain that understanding.
I wish you the best in that pursuit should you choose that undertaking.

Blue Dragonfly's said:
Romans 5, Galatians 2, as two examples.
Romans 5 says we are justified by faith, it does not say we are justified by faith alone! Galatians 2 says nothing about "faith alone" or "scripture alone". If anything, Paul went to Peter, James and John to make sure his gospel was the same as theirs, "lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain." (verse 2)

Protestants got their OT canon by borrowing it from the Catholic Church, then hacked off 7 books because they didn't fit reformist opinions. The real question is "where did the OT canon come from?" Answering you is pointless because you can't acknowledge the development of the NT canon without resorting to bible origin fantasies. Both canons are the result of a 4 century developmental process. Sorry it doesn't fit on a T shirt.
 
Last edited:

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Blue Dragonfly's said:
Romans 5, Galatians 2, as two examples.
Yup - and that is NOT an answer.
I told him to form a cohesive argument from these 2 chapters of Scripture.

Telling me that the answer is “somewhere” within the text of TWO entire chapters of Scripture is evasion – not an answer,
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
During the Reformation, primarily for doctrinal reasons, Protestants removed seven books from the Old Testament: 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, and Judith, and parts of two others, Daniel and Esther. They did so even though these books had been regarded as canonical since the beginning of Church history.

As Protestant church historian J. N. D. Kelly writes, “It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible]. . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical books” (Early Christian Doctrines, 53).

Below we give patristic quotations from each of the deuterocanonical books. Notice how the Fathers quoted these books along with the protocanonicals. The deuterocanonicals are those books of the Old Testament that were included in the Bible even though there had been some discussion about whether they should be.

Also included are the earliest official lists of the canon. For the sake of brevity these are not given in full. When the lists of the canon cited here are given in full, they include all the books and only the books found in the modern Catholic Bible.
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The Didache
“You shall not waver with regard to your decisions [Sir. 1:28].” “Do not be someone who stretches out his hands to receive but withdraws them when it comes to giving [Sir. 4:31]” (Didache 4:5 [A.D. 70]).

The Letter of Barnabas
“Since, therefore, [Christ] was about to be manifested and to suffer in the flesh, his suffering was foreshown. For the prophet speaks against evil, ‘Woe to their soul, because they have counseled an evil counsel against themselves’ [Isa. 3:9], saying, ‘Let us bind the righteous man because he is displeasing to us’ [Wis. 2:12.]” (Letter of Barnabas 6:7 [A.D. 74]).

Clement of Rome
“By the word of his might [God] established all things, and by his word he can overthrow them. ‘Who shall say to him, “What have you done?” or who shall resist the power of his strength?’ [Wis. 12:12]” (Letter to the Corinthians 27:5 [ca. A.D. 80]).

Polycarp of Smyrna
“When you can do good, defer it not, because ‘alms delivers from death’ [Tob. 4:10, 12:9]” (Letter to the Philadelphians 10 [A.D. 135]).

Irenaeus
“Those . . . who are believed to be presbyters by many, but serve their own lusts and do not place the fear of God supreme in their hearts, but conduct themselves with contempt toward others and are puffed up with the pride of holding the chief seat [Matt. 23:6] and work evil deeds in secret, saying ‘No man sees us,’ shall be convicted by the Word, who does not judge after outward appearance, nor looks upon the countenance, but the heart; and they shall hear those words to be found in Daniel the prophet: ‘O you seed of Canaan and not of Judah, beauty has deceived you and lust perverted your heart’ [Dan. 13:56]. You that have grown old in wicked days, now your sins which you have committed before have come to light, for you have pronounced false judgments and have been accustomed to condemn the innocent and to let the guilty go free, although the Lord says, ‘You shall not slay the innocent and the righteous’ [Dan. 13:52, citing Ex. 23:7]” (Against Heresies 4:26:3 [A.D. 189]; Daniel 13 is not in the Protestant Bible).

“Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left on the earth, should both be under the rule of the saints and to minister to this [new] Jerusalem and that [his] kingdom shall be in it, saying, ‘Look around Jerusalem toward the east and behold the joy which comes to you from God himself. Behold, your sons whom you have sent forth shall come: They shall come in a band from the east to the west. . . . God shall go before with you in the light of his splendor, with the mercy and righteousness which proceed from him’ [Bar. 4:36—5:9]” (ibid., 5:35:1; Baruch was often considered part of Jeremiah, as it is here).

Hippolytus
“What is narrated here [in the story of Susannah] happened at a later time, although it is placed at the front of the book [of Daniel], for it was a custom with the writers to narrate many things in an inverted order in their writings. . . . [W]e ought to give heed, beloved, fearing lest anyone be overtaken in any transgression and risk the loss of his soul, knowing as we do that God is the judge of all and the Word himself is the eye which nothing that is done in the world escapes. Therefore, always watchful in heart and pure in life, let us imitate Susannah” (Commentary on Daniel [A.D. 204]; the story of Susannah [Dan. 13] is not in the Protestant Bible).

Cyprian of Carthage
“In Genesis [it says], ‘And God tested Abraham and said to him, “Take your only son whom you love, Isaac, and go to the high land and offer him there as a burnt offering”’ [Gen. 22:1–2]. . . . Of this same thing in the Wisdom of Solomon [it says], ‘Although in the sight of men they suffered torments, their hope is full of immortality’ [Wis. 3:4]. Of this same thing in the Maccabees [it says], ‘Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness’ [1 Macc. 2:52; see Jas. 2:21–23]” (Treatises 7:3:15 [A.D. 248]).

“So Daniel, too, when he was required to worship the idol Bel, which the people and the king then worshipped, in asserting the honor of his God, broke forth with full faith and freedom, saying, ‘I worship nothing but the Lord my God, who created the heaven and the earth’ [Dan. 14:5]” (Letters 55:5 [A.D. 253]; Daniel 14 is not in the Protestant Bible).

Council of Rome
“Now indeed we must treat of the divine scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [that is, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book, Ecclesiastes, one book, [and] Canticle of Canticles [Song of Songs], one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus [Sirach], one book . . . . Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books” (Decree of Pope Damasus [A.D. 382]).

Council of Hippo
“[It has been decided] that besides the canonical scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical scriptures are as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and a portion of the Psalms], the twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books . . .” (Canon 36 [A.D. 393]).

Council of Carthage III
“[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine scriptures. But the canonical scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees” (Canon 47 [A.D. 397]).

Augustine
“The whole canon of the scriptures, however, in which we say that consideration is to be applied, is contained in these books: the five of Moses . . . and one book of Joshua [Son of] Nave, one of Judges; one little book which is called Ruth . . . then the four of Kingdoms, and the two of Paralipomenon . . . . [T]here are also others too, of a different order . . . such as Job and Tobit and Esther and Judith and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Esdras . . . . Then there are the prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David, and three of Solomon. . . . But as to those two books, one of which is entitled Wisdom and the other of which is entitled Ecclesiasticus and which are called ‘of Solomon’ because of a certain similarity to his books, it is held most certainly that they were written by Jesus Sirach. They must, however, be accounted among the prophetic books, because of the authority which is deservedly accredited to them” (Christian Instruction 2:8:13 [A.D. 397]).

“We read in the books of the Maccabees [2 Macc. 12:43] that sacrifice was offered for the dead. But even if it were found nowhere in the Old Testament writings, the authority of the Catholic Church which is clear on this point is of no small weight, where in the prayers of the priest poured forth to the Lord God at his altar the commendation of the dead has its place” (The Care to be Had for the Dead 1:3 [A.D. 421]).

The Apostolic Constitutions
“Now women also prophesied. Of old, Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron [Ex. 15:20], and after her, Deborah [Judges. 4:4], and after these Huldah [2 Kgs. 22:14] and Judith [Judith 8], the former under Josiah and the latter under Darius” (Apostolic Constitutions 8:2 [A.D. 400]).

Jerome
“What sin have I committed if I follow the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating [in my preface to the book of Daniel] the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the story of Susannah [Dan. 13], the Song of the Three Children [Dan. 3:29–68, RSV-CE], and the story of Bel and the Dragon [Dan. 14], which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant” (Against Rufinius 11:33 [A.D. 401]).

Pope Innocent I
“A brief addition shows what books really are received in the canon. These are the things of which you desired to be informed verbally: of Moses, five books, that is, of Genesis, of Exodus, of Leviticus, of Numbers, of Deuteronomy, and Joshua, of Judges, one book, of Kings, four books, and also Ruth, of the prophets, sixteen books, of Solomon, five books, the Psalms. Likewise of the histories, Job, one book, of Tobit, one book, Esther, one, Judith, one, of the Maccabees, two, of Esdras, two, Paralipomenon, two books” (Letters 7 [A.D. 408]).

Finally, I challenge you to produce evidence that a 66 book canon used as a Bible in any church before the 14th century. Until you produce such evidence, a 66 book canon is a tradition of men.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BreadOfLife

Blue Dragonfly's

Well-Known Member
Jul 15, 2022
1,190
582
113
not this Christian parody site
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Romans 5 says we are justified by faith, it does not say we are justified by faith alone! Galatians 2 says nothing about "faith alone" or "scripture alone". If anything, Paul went to Peter, James and John to make sure his gospel was the same as theirs, "lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain." (verse 2)

Protestants got their OT canon by borrowing it from the Catholic Church, then hacked off 7 books because they didn't fit reformist opinions. The real question is "where did the OT canon come from?" Answering you is pointless because you can't acknowledge the development of the NT canon without resorting to bible origin fantasies. Both canons are the result of a 4 century developmental process. Sorry it doesn't fit on a T shirt.
Thank you. Hopefully that will assist his understanding.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Thank you. Hopefully that will assist his understanding.
The very same evasiveness you've displayed ALL along.

You never gave me an answer and you never intended to even after I answered your question and proved you WRONG.

Chalk another one up for Catholic truth . . .
 
Last edited:

Reggie Belafonte

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2018
5,804
2,896
113
63
Brisbane
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I believe one has to have a Leader of a Religion, just as one needs a Leader of a Nation or State. that stands out and guides with authority of the set guidelines. Just as it is with a Pope !
Now Prots love to peddle that the Pope rules like a tyrant with total power and such as he is way above the rest ? well that is the case with Pope Frances, but not with Pope JP2 or Pope Ben, as they had the true system of the 12 and the 24 to work within and then the Pope would make points of regards set out in detail as to why etc, but Pope France does not do that, such leaves huge blanks in his direction missing as to what he is truly doing on a subject. and he has been called out on such by the top ranks of the RCC that are appalled by his lack of regard for such.
The thing is that Pope France can not justify himself in fact and that's why such is left blank.
A real Pope has to justify everything he changes in total detail as to why they have made such a call. so other Popes can make reference to such a call, but with Pope Frances there are holes you could drive a truck through on such issues as they are wide open as to any justification.

You can not have a Church that has no Head to lead them, such will fail, not to mention even having a Head can be corrupted and we have seen this in the History of the RCC.
Not to mention there will always be corruption regardless within any organisation ! Now Popes all through history have called such out but have been powerless to truly deal with such problems.
Even Pope John called such out in a huge way and Pope JP2 and Pope Ben also totally feared the powers that were within the Church, they were powerless too such within.

We have the same problems within every Prot Church that have been and are undermining every Church from within.

There is a plot to undermine Christ Jesus for many years going on. Oh they want to bring in the Kingdom but they don't want Christ Jesus in it !
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,295
1,479
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
that only applies to adults who have need of repentance

so you want these kids to live years without Christ and you desire them to sin greatly so they have something to repent of, not Christian charity in my view!
Acts 2:38 does not apply to infants(...Repent, and be baptized....), nor does Matt 28:19(...and teach all nations, baptizing them...) .

They can neither repent, nor be taught.

They are innocent.

The RCC is completely nuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blue Dragonfly's

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Acts 2:38 does not apply to infants(...Repent, and be baptized....), nor does Matt 28:19(...and teach all nations, baptizing them...) .

They can neither repent, nor be taught.

They are innocent.

The RCC is completely nuts.
The Covenant with God in the OT applied to EVERYONE – even infants.

Were infants able to make the decision to enter the Covenant, Einstein? Did they “volunteer” to be circumcised?
NO
. It was the obedience of their PARENTS that got them into the Covenant.

Your impotent argument has been destroyed repeatedly on this forum – yet you persist in your anti-Biblical idiocy.
 

Blue Dragonfly's

Well-Known Member
Jul 15, 2022
1,190
582
113
not this Christian parody site
Faith
Other Faith
Country
United States
Acts 2:38 does not apply to infants(...Repent, and be baptized....), nor does Matt 28:19(...and teach all nations, baptizing them...) .

They can neither repent, nor be taught.

They are innocent.

The RCC is completely nuts.
I think the Latin Rite church objective is control. Always in all ways.
Money is the biggest motivator. Always in all ways.

To impart a baby needs be baptized so they don't go to Hell is to impugn the character of God,imo.

Burning babies is Moloch.Not Yahweh-Yeshua. :sweat:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truther

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I think the Latin Rite church objective is control. Always in all ways.
Money is the biggest motivator. Always in all ways.

To impart a baby needs be baptized so they don't go to Hell is to impugn the character of God,imo.

Burning babies is Moloch.Not Yahweh-Yeshua.
This, coming from a person who, in a cowardly fashion, FLED the conversation when I called his bluff by answering his question. Ummmmm, where are the answers to MY questions?
You never substantiated Sola Scriptura or Sola Fide from Scripture.

Babies are included in the promises of Christ – and YOUR rejection of them is what caused Him to rebuke His Disciples:
“Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God.” (Matt 19:14, Luke 18:16).

Those who would keep the Sacrament of Baptism from infants are doing precisely what Christ himself disapproved of. BOTH Peter (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14) and Paul (Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16) Baptized entire households – from the oldest to the youngest.

As for moneyYOU would also need a lor of money if you were the LARGEST charitable organization on the Planet. Every day, the Catholic Church feeds, clothes, shelters and educates more people than any organization in the world.
Charities run by the Church include:
- 5,305 hospitals including 1694 in the Americas and 1,150 in Africa.
- 18,179 clinics including 5,762 in the Americas and 5,312 in Africa 3,884 in Asia.
- 17,223 homes for old people, the terminally ill and the handicapped – most of them (8,021) in Europe and the Americas (5,650).
- 9,882 orphanages – a third of them in Asia.
- Countless homeless shelters and food banks.


In fact, most COUNTRIES around the world don’t even come close to the charitable contributions of the Catholic Church.

So much for YOUR baseless, idiotic accusations . . .
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,295
1,479
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Covenant with God in the OT applied to EVERYONE – even infants.

Were infants able to make the decision to enter the Covenant, Einstein? Did they “volunteer” to be circumcised?
NO
. It was the obedience of their PARENTS that got them into the Covenant.

Your impotent argument has been destroyed repeatedly on this forum – yet you persist in your anti-Biblical idiocy.
When you were an infant, what covenant did you make with God?
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,295
1,479
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I think the Latin Rite church objective is control. Always in all ways.
Money is the biggest motivator. Always in all ways.

To impart a baby needs be baptized so they don't go to Hell is to impugn the character of God,imo.

Burning babies is Moloch.Not Yahweh-Yeshua. :sweat:
Amen, babies are saved at birth.

They grow up to be sinners as they become adolescents/adults.

God does not send babies to hell.

Catholics teach the silliest doctrines in Christendom.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
When you were an infant, what covenant did you make with God?
I entered the New Covenant and therefore, the family of GodJUST like the infants in the OT entered the Covenant and the People of God. In BOTH cases – it was done by the faith and obedience of our PARENTS.

I believe this is the 50th time I’ve explained this to you.
You’re about as dense as they come . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Amen, babies are saved at birth.

They grow up to be sinners as they become adolescents/adults.

God does not send babies to hell.

Catholics teach the silliest doctrines in Christendom.
Can either of you geniuses show me where the BIBLE teaches this?
Chapter and Verse, please . . .