Search results

What faith tradition/denomination do you adhere to?

Yes, yes, "whore of Babylon" and all that rubbish - but in the end - YOU can't seem to substantiate ONE SINGLE one of the "quotes" you posted - CAN you?? Thanks for proving me right once again, my dishonest friend . . .

Just exposing more FALSE accusations is all . . .

Then perhaps you should work on some of your fellow non-Catholics who are - unlike yourself - rabid anti-Catholics who CONSTANTLY attack my faith . . .

When I respond to an anti-Catholic attack - I will expose the hypocrisy. When I respond to a simple "disagreement" like the one you and I had - I will respond in kind. I've had many charitable conversations here - but there are some - like Taken or brakelite and others who don't want to have...

And that's fine. HOWEVER - if you're going to find fault with MY posts for being too "aggressive" - then let's have some equal parity. I don't start anything here. There's NO record of me having every created ONE single thread because I'm not here to start fights. I'm ONLY here to expose...

Not necessarily - but you're condemning MY post without mentioning what I was responding to.

"Disagreement" is fine - but not anti-Catholic attack.

But you DIDN'T find quietthinker's comment to ME to be "disrespectful"?? This is the problem I've been talking about on this forum for YEARS. All of YOU can blather on with every manner of insuolt and filthy lie about the Catholic Church - but God forbid that we defend ourselves or point out...

I asked this of Taken because she said I made an "idiotic" remark by stating that she DIDN'T believe as I did. This would lead me to believe that she DOES agree that we are saved at Baptism.

No - it's for the forgiveness of our sins and the cleansing of our impurities (Ezek. 36:25-27, Acts 2:38). It is how we are brought into the Family of God (Eph. 4:5-6). It is NOT merely a symbol - but a necessity for salvation (John 3:5).

That's what the tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually-splintering sects need to ask themselves - not Christ's Church.

Sooooo, you AGREE that Baptism saves us?? If SO then why NOT Baptize babies?? And - if you don't - what was so "idiotic" about what I said?? Instead of getting so defensive - try having a civil conversation.

No - I definitely understand what it is and what it does. I am trying to find SOME common ground so we can possibly agree on at least PART of what it does.

And I respect your difference of opinion. I wish everybody here debated and discussed the way YOU do . . .

You're changing the subject. This has nothing to do with salvation by works. It has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that YOU don't know ythe Gospel because YOU said that Jesus is NOT on every person who needs help. HE said differently, as I showed you iin the Lesson of the Sheep and Goats...

Not exactly. First of all - nobody is saying that Baptism is EXACTLY like circumcision. Circumcision was not regenerative, whereas Baptism IS. I said that as far as it being the means of initiation into God's family - it is the same. As for genetics - there were Jewish converts. who had to be...

This STILL doesn't answer the question as to HOW a baby was welcomed into the Covenant with God by something their PARENTS chose for them. Why would God allow that but NOT initiation by Baptism - and WHO says that He did? Finally - WHY did the Early Church Fathers unanimously teach Infant...

First of all - what is a "copy/paste" replacement? Secondly - you're wrong about simple genetics making you part of the Covenant. You had to be circumcised - it was a REQUIREMENT. Finally - NOWHERE in the NT does it say that ONLY a believer can enter into the New Covenant.

Catholics believe in Baptismal regeneration - but that's NOT what I'm talking about. I'm talking about Baptism as the means of our initiation into God's family - not salvation. I already know that you don't agree that Baptism saves us. But - your anti-Catholicism aside - do you agree that it...