John Yurich USA wrote:
Why are atheists so against the teaching of both creationism and evolution in public schools and public colleges?

Lurker wrote:
Christians do not delay but hasten with their children to Baptism that they may received the gift of salvation and regeneration ..(Galatians 3: 27)."
Dennis Kastens

If Kastens wasn't saying that sprinkling saves, his readers would have been convinced otherwise anyways. It gets better, for Kastens here exhorts the parents to HASTEN to do something now so that in the future this "may/maynot" have done anything.

John UK wrote:
Eh?

Curious wrote:
What does the Bible tell you about the age of the earth?

John Yurich USA wrote:
Kindly answer the question. How can you possibly believe that one who is not Born Again and not guided by the Holy Spirit would have the ability to know that there are some unscriptural doctrines in the RCC?

Either way, "logic" dictates that RCC cannot be followed.

John Yurich USA wrote:
... infant Baptism is just a dedication of infants .... Adult Baptism is just a dedication of adults...

SteveR wrote:
{ahem}
The Catholic Bible translates it with 'hills' not mountains

Ahem!

SteveR wrote:
Revelation 17 says 7 Mountains not hills
The correct translation confirms MOUNTAINS not hills
(KJV)Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
Look it up in the AV, or better yet the Received Text and you will find the correct translation for 'oros' is mountains

SteveR wrote:
I dont know, but you will have to be more convincing then listing the 7 hills of Rome to convince anyone
also answer
1) Why didnt John of Patmos use the Greek word 'bounos' to make it clear its 'hill' and not 'mountain'
2) .. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

CJW wrote:
Everytime in the KJV Old Testament where you find the word LORD in all capital letters, you will find that this word is from the Hebrew consonants YHWH, from which the words "Jehovah" and "Yahweh" are derived.

SteveR
You seem to always fall on the side of defending Rome. Why?

In another thread where "seven hills" was used in refering to Rome, you argued that the text translated as "mountains", not "hills". Rome argues that same point vociferously.

Here, where there's a contention on text, you state

SteveR wrote:
1) The primary language spoken by apostles in the Gospel era was Aramaic

But what your sly comment really belies is the fact that Rome has been arguing in favour of some nonexistent Aramiac text for certain passages because the Greek text clearly destroys Rome. (For example, c.f grammatical gender, peter the rock.)

Lisa wrote:
Does that mean 52 % consider it peaceful ???

Adonai wrote:
One could also believe there will be those known as Muslims on this earth, who will be in heaven with us.
Those who seek God with their whole heart will not be disappointed.

Folder wrote:
Baptists rejection of the infant contends with Christ's words "suffer the little children to come unto me." - The child in the Baptist family is apparently not included in this invitation.

Parents are to bring up their children on the fear and knowledge of God. Nobody's holding the children back. This is an ongoing responsibility, not a reference to a onetime act of sprinkling magic water. .

The passage you quoted goes on to show that true conversion produces in us a childlike reliance on God with our very being.
"Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven"Mat18:3

You argue that why can't paedo's baptize unbelievers since some adults we baptize turn out to be false believers? We are called to obedience in proclaiming the gospel message, God reserves the sole rights to hold anyone accountable. You baptize unbelievers intentionally, you KNOW AHEAD OF TIME for CERTAINTY that some will want nothing to do with the LORD.

SteveR wrote:
I agree
Its really really really sad that the one person Christians should be able to trust, a person they should have no worry to hug, cant embrace them the way they are called to.
I feel really blessed for my family, as they and I love our pastor. I hug him all the time

Proof that prophets perfoming miraculous signs and wonders have not ceased!

John Yurich USA wrote:
I accept all 39 Articles of Religion of the Church of England including Article XIX but I don't believe the Catholic Church is entirely in error since there are scriptural Catholic doctrines.

Folder wrote:
Sixteen centuries of Covenant and baptism of the whole family regardless of human ability, - the seed or children of covenanted parents had been baptised according to the Word of God. This truth was never rescinded by Christ or the Apostles.

Folder wrote:
The Baptists changing of the Greek definition of baptism

Folder wrote:
none can perceive the elect [child]. Yet the Baptist must obviously reject them in baptism

John UK wrote:
Baptism accomplishes spiritual circumcision?

Folder wrote:
John
Does this statement imply that Baptists believe there is - Zero - spiritual element in baptism?

If spiri'l circumc'n happens at baptism, then baptism imparts salvation. And infants are saved at and through baptism too.

Colossians 2:9-14
9For in Christ all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,10and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;11and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;12having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.13When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,14having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

Observer wrote:
Granted CV. It's difficult to squeeze everything one needs to say in a single post .., if ya get my drift!

While I am addressing you, something I wrestled with was how those who held to regulative principle reconciled infant baptism. Your response was spot on for me.