Re: How old were you when you became SAVED/accpeted Christ as your Lord & Savior??
The bible nowhere teaches that it is the sole rule of faith. Yes it does: Deut 4:2, Prov 30:6, Rev. 22:18 Soooo,
here is a napkin to wipe the egg off your face. Thanks, but you need it yourself. And Cyprian is an early Church Father. Whereas, you are .... what? Church father? Which church? The RCC? So what? His writings did not even qualify to be included in the Holy Scriptures. Do you realize that the RCC is NOT the oldest? The CHRISTIAN church is the Oldest and is so named in scripture. Check out this link for many scriptures to verify this fact: http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=Christian&searchtype=all&version1=49&spanbegin=1&spanend=73
Since the Catholic Church, along with the Eastern Orthodox Church, wrote the bible, Wrong. The RCC came into being around the 2nd century. The whole of the Bible was written long before that over the course of 4000 years. God's word tells us we are to give credit where credit is due and THAT credit is not due the RCC. your comment about the Church being bibically wrong is .... a joke [to use your own word earlier]. I'm not saying that the whole of the RCC is wrong. They do believe that Christ is the Son of God and that He shed His blood for the atonement of our sins and died and rose from the dead, defeating both physical and spiritual death. HOWEVER, many of the traditions, ceremonies and rituals are pagan, having been incorporated into Christianity by Constantine in the 2nd century. Over time, it has become, for those in the RCC, more important to follow those pagan traditions, etc. than it has to follow the word of God, which until Luther was kept from the people by the priests and Rome for the sole purpose of having control over the masses of people. Rome understood that if the people found out that all they needed to have was a personal relationship with Christ and obey His written word, they would have no need of the Roman government…which extorted money from them on a consistent basis. They taught the people that if they did not do as they said,…pay alms, say x number of repetitive prayers and much more, they would burn in hell and that is simply not in God's word or His way.
Those Traditions you ridicule are Sacred Traditions passed on by the Apostles. No they are not. The apostles did not pass on traditions of men. In fact, Paul speaks against traditions of men (Gal 1:14) What the apostles did was to introduce both Jews and Gentiles to the personage of Jesus Christ and mentored them in establishing a personal relationship with Him. They have equal Authority with written Tradition -- Scripture. Excuse me?! THAT is heresy!! There is no writing on the face of the earth that equals or outranks Scripture in its authority. Moreover, the bible itself says the Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth. 1 Tim 3:15b reads " the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth. This says that the church (household of God, believers being the temple of the Holy Spirit) is the pillar (structure to hold something up) and support OF TRUTH. The foundation of the church is the prophets and apostles and Christ is the cornerstone (Eph 2:19-21) It is guided by the Holy Spirit in teaching on matters of faith. Unless a person, including any RCC priest, is born again per John 3 & rom 10:9-10 and has a personal relationship with Christ, it is highly unlikely that the guiding they got was holy. It was a deception. As a "former" Catholic I would think you knew this? Yes, I was taught that, but just because it was taught does not mean that it was correct! ALL deceptions are put forth, by man, as truth because the heart is so easily deceived!! (Deut 11:16, Isa 44:20, Jer 49:16, and Ob 1:3) It was the PRIDE of the leaders of the early church that allowed their hearts to accept the incorporation of the pagan rituals and ceremonies. It was pride that fostered a desire to control the people, en masse. And it was pride, FYI, that brought about all the witch trials…accusing people that were truly hearing from God of witchcraft. Why? Because RELIGION is all about man-based pride, not relationship with Jesus. What's that-- you were throwing spitballs in your religious education class when they taught it? No wonder you are a protestant. Again with the sarcasm? Is that your fruit? Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, I don't see sarcasm listed there!
The baby responds to the grace received as the baby matures. Do babies respond to love given from Grandma 1000 miles away? No! They respond to contact and relationship. Grace is God's giving us what we do not deserve. A baby cannot respond to it because a baby is incapable of doing so. They are sanctified by a believing parent. Once confirmed in his faith by the Sacrament of Confirmation, he is on his own. Again, confirmation is not in the Bible. You think it is? Show me with verses!! That also should have been taught to a former Catholic like yourself. Yes, I went through confirmation. So? Then I went on to fornicate, lie, drink, do some drugs. What good did it do me? Scriptures say that liars go to hell! Fornicators go to hell? Guess that baby baptism and confirmation didn't really work did it? In fact, every one of my friends that got confirmed did pretty much the same things as I did! We were ALL good little Catholic girls and boys. We were! But we were NOT Christians, followers of Christ, in right relationship with Him.
It is not adding to the word of God, unless one is a fundamentalist .Oh…so if you're not a fundamentalist it's OK to add to the word of God?? Not! And scripture reiterates Rev. 22:18 several times in both OT and NT. Logic enhances one's understanding of the Word of God. Logic is the SCIENCE of reasoning and does not 'enhance' anything. So, the probability that there were infants in the household, coupled with Sacred Tradition which has always taught Infant Baptism is Christian, and the fact that the Bible does not prohibit it, means the Church's position is on solid footing whereas you have no footing. Every Biblical baptism was done by the person desiring to be baptized coming on their own volition to be baptized. Baptism was not something that was DONE TO a person.
Babies were DEDICATED (Jewish culture, on the 8th day, also the day of circumcision, believers were baptized. Grace for both intact. Babies cannot believe without cognitive ability that does not develop until they are older.
Seriously, if infant baptism was a no no, I would think the bible would mention that. The does not say to not bite your fingernails or your toenails either, but it does not mention it. IT IS COMMON SENSE given as WISDOM by God. You're trying to insert a prohibition into the bible, where none has ever existed, is ADDING TO THE WORD OF GOD! On the contrary, YOU are attempting to promote something that is not mentioned in Scripture, adding to the word of God. You are accusing me of something you are doing, and which I am not doing. Then show me, specifically, in the Bible, where is says that anyone's baby was baptized rather than dedicated.
There really is no serious question about infant baptism except among heretics. That's right, there isn't. Simply, it is heretical to assume that something is God ordained when it is not found in His written word.
Maggie
