Search results

Nonsense. Baptism has been practiced by immersion and pouring since the time of the Apostles in the FIRST century. Do I have Scriptural proof for this? NOPE – but neither do YOU have Scriptural proof of full immersion. We get the details from history and documents like The Didache (Teachings...

That is absolutely FALSE. Besides – Peter baptized the ENTIRE household of Cornelius. Paul Baptized the ENTIRE households of Stephanas and the Philippian Jailer. “ENTIRE” households had people of ALL ages – from elderly people to small children and infants. Besides - the Early Church Fathers...

Not at all. The letters of Ignatius give us a front seat view at the 1st century Church. That’s why they are important. NOBODY is claiming that they are Scripture. They are a witness to history and 1st century Church doctrinal practice. I was merely pointing out that YOU are conflating...

That's funny - the ONLY Church we read about from the end of the first century on is the CATHOLIC Church. We don't hear about the Baptist sect until the beginning of the 17th century. STUDY your history . . .

Doesn’t matter a hill of beans whether you don’t “consider” yourself a Protestant. There are THREE types of Christians: Catholic Orthodox Protestant That’s it. If you ain’t one of them – you ain’t a Christian. Baptists are Protestants. The origins of your sect go back only as far as 1606...

No – YOU reject them because they don’t jive with your 21st century Protestant sensibilities. Your Protestant Fathers iin the 16th century agreed with much of what was in the letters of Ignatius. it was only over time that their successors and ecclesiastical descendants “adjusted” their...

Nice cop-out. I didn’t make ANY claims. All I did was posit some very Biblical points for YOU to ponder. Your evasive response speaks VOLUMES about your contradictory claim that the Catholic position on the Last Supper was “odd” – yet none of the other points I made were Think about them and...

And yet, you DON’T find it “odd” that 8-day-old babies had to have their foreskin cut off as part of the Covenant with God?? You DON’T find it “odd” that a virgin became pregnant with God?? You DON’T find it “odd” that an all-powerful God would come down to die an agonizing criminal’s death on...

Then do us a favor and produce ONE SINGLE Early Church teaching to that effect. Show me ONE writing from the Early Church that agrees with the Protestant assertion that the Eucharist was merely symbolic. Do that - and I will leave the Catholic Church today and join YOUR sect.

Again – the Epistles of Ignatius were never called into question until recently because they are simply far too important to the development of Christendom. Protestant scholars try to debunk them as “forgeries” like they do every other EFC writing that supports Catholic doctrine. You have...

God doesn't "need" to do anything. He doesn't nee YOU and He doesn't need me - and He certainly didn't need to come down here and be nailed to a cross and die an agonizing death. God does because God WILLS - not because YOU think it's a good idea. God knows we are physical people with tangible...

In "fact"?? You didn't prove your hypothesis. You simply quoted a guy who believes them to be false. I can quote TEN guys who say Scripture is false - but that doesn't "prove" anything . . .

Of course you do. To agree with me would mean leaving your sect and becoming Catholic.

I don't need to disprove a negative. The onus is on YOU to prove that the Letters of Ignatius were false. This is Debating 101 . . .

Nothing "magical" about the power of God. With God ALL things are possible (Matt. 19:26).

Yup - the last refuge of the TRULY desperate. Simply write off the Letters of Ignatius as "forgeries" when you can't argue their doctrinal content. The problem here is that you have Early Church Fathers for the next 500 years saying essentially the SAME things Ignatius did - and many other...

More nonsense. Jesus was speaking to them sacramentally. They, in their limited human thinking, thought that He was telling them that they needed to start eating Him – skin, muscle and bones. That is NOT what He was trying to convey to them but their hearts and minds were closed just as YOURS...

This is just ignorant nonsense. You would have to completely ignore Scripture to make this kind of Scripturally-bankrupt statement. Time for a Bible lesson . . . In The Bread of Life Discourse in John 6 - Jesus tells His followers that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood. He goes on...

That's funny. When I read the Early Church Fathers - nothing could be further from the truth. The following was written by a student of the Apostle John - while John was still presumably ALIVE. Tell me - does this sound like the Baptist church - or the Catholic Church?? Ignatius of Antioch...

Wrong. We read about them in Rev. 5:8 - and they are interceding for us.