Posted on 01/27/2016 6:19:11 AM PST by marshmallow
Here's a bunch more!!!
Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.[1]
Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy
Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy
Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.[2]
Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[3]
Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors' reserves on a single ceremony[4]
Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
What PARENTS?
They are NOT mentioned in your quoted verse.
We ALL 'know' that...
...it takes a village.
Goats are hydrophobic as well.
But your continual nagging is REALLY starting to...
>>Here’s a bunch more!!!
LOL. I thank the Reformers for getting us out of that madhouse!
bkmk
Q: Can you please clarify the Lutheran view of Baptism and what is its purpose? Does the child become a Christian when baptized?
A: Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God's grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ alone. The Bible tells us that such "faith comes by hearing" (Rom 10:17). Jesus Himself commands Baptism and tells us that Baptism is water used together with the Word of God (Matt 28:19- 20). Because of this, we believe that Baptism is one of the miraculous means of grace (another is God's Word as it is written or spoken), through which God creates and/or strengthens the gift of faith in a person's heart (see Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Gal 3:26-27; Rom 6:1-4; Col 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12:13). Terms the Bible uses to talk about the beginning of faith include "conversion" and "regeneration." Although we do not claim to understand fully how this happens, we believe that when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant. We believe this because the Bible says that infants can believe (Matt 18:6) and that new birth (regeneration) happens in Baptism (John 3:5-7; Titus 3:5-6). The infant's faith cannot yet, of course, be verbally expressed or articulated by the child, yet it is real and present all the same (see e.g., Acts 2:38-39; Luke 1:15; 2 Tim 3:15). The faith of the infant, like the faith of adults, also needs to be fed and nurtured by God's Word (Matt 28:18-20), or it will die.
Well look, the verse says everybody got baptized and you claim it naturally must be babies as well...
But right in the same verse which you conveniently leave out for your argument is the phrase that the whole house believed...That means there were no babies there...None...Not a single one...
But I'll bet you'll still quote half of that verse to prove babies got baptized with the whole household...
The children come to Jesus and Jesus didn't baptize a single one of them...You ought to pay more attention to what the bible says instead of fumbling around with what someone wants you to believe what they think it should mean...There's not a thing there about baptism...
>>But right in the same verse which you conveniently leave out for your argument is the phrase that the whole house believed...That means there were no babies there...None...Not a single one...
But, I can disagree without the name-calling. People are chosen by God before they are even born. The verse does not say that there were no babies there. You just imply that it does because it fits your beliefs. Just because a person can’t speak does not mean they don’t believe. Would you deny baptism to a person who has serious mental impairments? They can’t make a convincing statement of faith any more than a baby can.
Not wanting to travel under a false flag, let me state right off the bat that I don't believe in the "new testament." However--
Don't you love the way Catholics and Orthodox comb their bibles for support of things that simply aren't there . . . and then turn right around and say that stuff that actually is in the Bible didn't actually happen (Genesis 1-11, Daniel, Esther, Jonah)????? They even reject the testimony of their otherwise "authoritative" church fathers, claiming that they were "men of their time" who didn't know any better!!!
No wonder Catholicism is turning to powder. But don't try to tell that to Catholics (or Orthodox) here. They're still trying to justify higher criticism and evolutionism because to do otherwise would be "Protestant!!!"
Protestants do not claim to be infallible. We make mistakes. Catholics cannot claim the Pope is infallible and then turn around and say, "Oops. Sorry we goofed."
For Catholics either the Inquisition correctly burned heretics at the stake-or-the Pope is not infallible. Protestants, OTOH are more than willing to admit our sinful nature.
Perhaps your Fundamentalist Protestant roots are beckoning you home. Rather than snipe at the one holy catholic apostolic church, why not return to your Protestant home and stop kicking the goads ?
The parents wanted to bring their little ones to the Messiah and the Apostles objected. Jesus said "Forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven." Do you deny what the Messiah commanded ?
Of course I don't...But I don't make up stories about baptism being in there somewhere like you are doing...
So you publicly admit you are commanded by the Messiah not to prevent parents from bringing little ones, who cannot yet repent, to the Messiah, but out of your modern tradition (for even Protestants baptize their children) prevent them from being baptized even though it is no where forbidden by the Messiah or the apostles ?
The reference is to future prophecy...No Catholic in the world will ever get that or ever did...And how do I know it's future prophecy??? Because Jesus wasn't around too long after that...There's hasn't been a way for anyone to bring babies to Jesus for 2000 years...
It's a prophecy of the kingdom of heaven...That kingdom is when and where Jesus will sit on a physical throne in physical Jerusalem, Israel and reign for a thousand years...
Then is when people are not to prevent babies and little children from being brought to Jesus...There's not a Catholic child who's ever been brought to Jesus...
Now does it have a spiritual application for the Christian...Of course...And that's raise your children up in a Christian environment...
but out of your modern tradition (for even Protestants baptize their children) prevent them from being baptized even though it is no where forbidden by the Messiah or the apostles ?
No modern tradition to it...It's a matter of believing God or believing your religion...And as you can see from the following scripture, they are not the same...
Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Act 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Just as soon as your baby believes with all his heart and can say, 'I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and believe it, then you can baptize the little tike...THAT'S the instruction provided by God for baptism...
Modern tradition??? Hardly...Ancient scripture...
Did you come up with this interpretation by yourself or did a man (or woman) teach it to you. Are there others here that agree with Iscool, and if so which Protestant devolved faith communities and sects have this novel interpretation and tradition that little ones cannot be saved, as it were, until a literal 1000 reign of the Messiah ? I'm living to hear the names and your public testimony supporting Iscool's interpretation/tradition.
I'm seeing that it's a Catholic trait to read something and not only apparently completely misunderstand it but add their own narration to it...
I never said any such thing as you suggested...I didn't say a word about children being saved...ALL young children and babies go to heaven...
You don't like that thousand year Millennial reign stuff, do you...Do you know how much of the Old Testament is dedicated to that 1000 years??? More than half of it...Do you know when the Old Testament ends??? About Matt. 28...
There's over 30,000 scriptures and you guys don't know what to do with 99.5% of it...
God told us of the reign of Jesus Christ on earth and he wrote thousands of scriptures telling us about it...And there's no Catholic religion there...
I'm seeing that it's a Catholic trait to read something and not only apparently completely misunderstand it but add their own narration to it...
I never said any such thing as you suggested...I didn't say a word about children being saved...ALL young children and babies go to heaven...
You don't like that thousand year Millennial reign stuff, do you...Do you know how much of the Old Testament is dedicated to that 1000 years??? More than half of it...Do you know when the Old Testament ends??? About Matt. 28...
There's over 30,000 scriptures and you guys don't know what to do with 99.5% of it...
God told us of the reign of Jesus Christ on earth and he wrote thousands of scriptures telling us about it...And there's no Catholic religion there...
There are plenty of Christians who agree with me and plenty who don't...
And you know what??? It doesn't make a bit of difference...No one is in jeopardy of losing their salvation regardless of what they believe about the Kingdom...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.