Search results

It is you who are denying baptism actually does something. This again strikes me odd that you care about the method of baptism given you do not actually believe baptism does that which Scripture states it does.

These things in my post ---> 1 Peter 3:21 ...are hyperlinks to Holy Scriptures. Try clicking on one. There are ten of them in my post.

...except for all those pesky verses which states baptism IS essential in order to have eternal life... - You must be baptized to be saved. - Mark 16:16 - It is the normative means by which God brings people to newness of life - Romans 6:4. - It means the old life and person has died in...

You are not immersed in a symbol. There is no such thing as a "dry" baptism. Christianity 101.

First, water in salvation history brings both death and life. It represents the destruction of the old (former ways) and recreates something new. The waters of the deluge washed the sinners away, and through it something new was created. Thus Noah and his family were saved from sin through the...

Mark 16:16 ---> "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." It looks like you and the other anti-Sacramentalists are trying to center the command on "believe" and make the point that if one doesn't believe the Gospel, he'll be condemned...

Did you not even read what you just quoted??? "...us as were BAPTIZED into Jesus Christ were BAPTIZED into his death...so we should walk in NEWNESS OF LIFE." It's in my Gospel ---> See Mark 16:16 ---> "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be...

"This is the simplest way to put it: the power, effect, benefit, fruit, and purpose of baptism is that it saves. For no one is baptized in order to become a prince, but as the words say, ‘to be saved.’ To be saved, as everyone knows, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death and the...

If one looks up the etymological origin of “tongue”, you will see the Latin root lingua, from which we get the word language. Lingua is Latin for both tongue and language. Ergo, speaking in tongues = speaking in languages This is the clear meaning described in the Scriptures and prophesied by...

No, as once again I am simply asking you to support your assertion, which you made here ↓ I provided primary sources to refute your assertion. You have not offered ONE piece of evidence supporting your assertion. It appears you were simply talking out of your hat. Again, St. Paul is...

No, you made this assertion: "There is no evidence that Peter ever traveled to Rome (Paul's comments indicate Peter probably did not)." See below link. I then proceeded to provide a list of historical accounts, beginning in the first century up until the third, testifying to and affirming...

Indeed. And St. Paul affirms St. Peter's testimony that Mark was indeed with St. Peter in Rome. When St. Paul was in Rome under custodia militaris, one of the captivity epistles he wrote was to the faithful at Colossae. Writing from Rome to the Colossians, St. Paul sends them the kind wishes...

Not sure how you can chalk it up to a "one-off" when I've given you multiple examples of St. Peter stating he was called to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles. Here is another example, this time from none other than St. Paul, when he had to confront St. Peter for his hypocrisy... "But when I saw...

Here again is St. Peter speaking at the Council of Jerusalem. He could not be more explicit. Acts 15:6-11: The apostles and the elders met together to consider this matter. After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "My brothers, you know that in the early days God...

I'm not asking you to prove a negative. I'm asking you to support your assertion, which you made here: I just gave you evidence from each of the first few centuries. I could provide more from each of those and continue on throughout the subsequent centuries. Can you provide ONE source which...

...Except for all those pesky historical accounts which place Peter in Rome. First Epistle, 5-6, St. Clement in c. 70 A.D. Epistle to the Romans, 4, St. Ignatius of Antioch in c. 110 A.D. Against Heresies, III.1.1 and III.3.1-2, St. Irenaeus in c. 180 A.D. Commentary on the First Epistle of...

Does St. Peter say that A GenitlE or THE GentileS would hear the gospel from his mouth and believe in Acts 15:7? Also, regarding Acts 11, when Peter was "called onto the carpet," who won out and was correct? Peter or the Jews???

Acts 15:7: "And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, 'Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.'"

Here is what the word of God teaches... Gen 2:17 ---> "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 3:3 ---> "But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath...

What's your solution? Just kill infants so as to spare them from these appetites? Apart from the miracle of new life itself, I view these appetites in infants as proof for the existence of God. Man, from his infancy, is looking for something outside of himself for satisfaction. That...