Just admit that you are wrong. So you know better than the God inspired Bible what are incorrect passages. Jesus told the Apostles Go forth Preach and Baptize.
Catholics have the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles in the oral tradition.
Just because you left the Catholic Church doesn’t make you more authoritative than the 2000 years of tradition that the Holy Spirit protects from error.
Don’t misrepresent that the Catholic Church doesn’t teach the importance of Faith in God and keeping His commandments.
Yes priests still exorcise the demons and devil from individuals. I know a priest (now a Bishop) that from the pulpit (a English speaker) spoke in Spanish to a Spanish audience and made an error in pronunciation that was brought to his attention. The next week the Holy Spirit gave him the ability to clearly speak and understand Spanish. Yes God still works miracles including Eucharistic miracles.
It seems to me that many preach that little faith is the same as a true faith in God. That implies that having a little faith allows one to ignore the teachings of Jesus that they don’t agree with.
If you do not believe in Baptism and that it forgives sins and it is necessary for salvation, then you may want to determine the effect on your soul.
May you truly understand the Truth and live it.
However, Rome does not have those oral teachings. Rome cannot definitively say, "xyz was said by Paul."
If Rome believes the ECFs are in 100% agreement on the issues they are deceiving themselves as these are not in agreement on the issues near and dear to Rome as has been demonstrated on these threads.
Rome claims these teachings don't contradict Scripture yet that is not the case....in many instances they do.
The Immaculate Conception is not even supported in Scripture per the Catholic Encyclopedia Online.
If Rome truly believed the ECFs writings were inspired they would have incorporated them in their canon at Trent. That Rome did not is telling.
It is also telling the early church did not consider these texts to be inspired and did not include them in the canon.
Rome has done what the Mormons have done....they've added to Scripture.
I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.
So if baptism were required for salvation, then why would Christ send Paul to preach the gospel and NOT baptize?
If baptism were required for salvation that would mean that the finished work of Christ on the cross was not enough to save people.
Anything you add to the cross in order to be saved is what you are trusting in.
If baptism were enough to save someone, Christ died for nothing. All we'd have to do then is be baptized and Jesus did not need to suffer.
Claiming that ANYTHING besides the cross ensures salvation makes a mockery of the suffering and death of Jesus. It makes all He endured meaningless and useless.