Which Peter?

It has already been answered for you ad naseum DHK and you don't accept the answer. You have been shown from Scripture how a covenant works, how the hierarchial faith of the parents is sufficient for the child, how the Early Church gave explicit instructions for the baptism of all including infants, and how the Church developed these practices from the teaching left by the apostles.

You have also been challenged to find ONE SINGLE COUNCIL which disputed the doctrine of baptism. You haven't as of yet responded to that, and you will not be able to, since there were NO ANABAPTISTS until their man-made heretical doctrines popped up in the Middle Ages.

Why bother putting up all your challenges to us. We have answered them and you ignore the facts like all professional anti-Catholics do.

Sheeeesh!!

 

Talk about ad nauseum. I have provided you with historical information coming from your own Catholic sources. Cardinal Hosius quotes Waldenses as being anabaptists right from the time of the first century. But you won't even accept a Catholic historian on that.

I have shown you from Scripture that the covenant is between God and Israel. It is you that fails to believe the Scriptures.

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Also, there is no Scripture anywhere, about the early church giving any instruction about the baptism of infants! That was a heresy developed by the Catholic Church. The early believers never practiced it.

You want me to find a council (Catholic of course) which disputes infant baptism?? Do I care? Stack all the writings and decrees of all the councils of all the ages on the left side of my desk; and then put the Bible on the right side of my desk. The Bible, by far, will outweigh the other books in authority, in authenticity, in accuracy. What need I, for the writings of the councils!

That is the precise problem Ed. You haven't answered questions; you ignore the facts; you dodge the harder challenges. You are like your friend, Grace Saves, who after reading a couple of Pinoy Baptist's post's said something to the effect that he couldn't answer them because to do so he would have to write a book. I guess that's a good way to weasel out of it.
DHK

Sheeeesh!! [/QB][/QUOTE]

 

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA - ANABAPTISTS

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA - BAPTISTS

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA - WALDENSES

WHERE did you get the SUPPOSED quote from Cardinal Hosius? From some STUPID Chick tract? According to the information on the Catholic Encyclopedia web site, the Waldenses were CATHOLICS who lost their minds and went into heresy and were excommunicated. Read it for yourself.

Then you go on to make this statement:

You want me to find a council (Catholic of course) which disputes infant baptism?? Do I care? Stack all the writings and decrees of all the councils of all the ages on the left side of my desk; and then put the Bible on the right side of my desk. The Bible, by far, will outweigh the other books in authority, in authenticity, in accuracy. What need I, for the writings of the councils!

That is not the point. The point is that IF there had been Anabaptists in significant numbers teaching yer Anabaptist heresy in the first century, the Church would have called a council to discuss the matter, just as they did with circumcision at Jerusalem, the deity of Christ at Nicea and all the other councils where teachings collided. Since there is NO evidence of baptismal mode and effacacy being discussed in a council, I maintain that there were no Baptists back then, or if there might have been, they were of such a insignificant minority that no one considered what they were teaching as having any importance whatsoever.

As for your claim of Biblical authority -- c'mon....don't make me choke on my dinner laughing. You believe the things YOU WANT TO BELIEVE and discard the rest. So, as others have asked you consistently, WHY is YOUR interpretation better than that of the Lutherans, the Methodists, the Oneness Pentecostals, or any others who also claim "sola scriptura" for their position and claim that the authority of the Bible gives them their right to believe what they believe?

Ya still don't "git it", do ya?

 

You didn't answer the question. Can I, a non-catholic at this point, get to heaven, according to the catholic church, if I:

1. Trust Jesus completely (Ie. Am saved) and live my life for Him, in a way that is pleasing to Him.
2. Reject the catholic church and its teachings knowingly. Specifically, I reject the birth control doctrine, something which I DO know exactly what is taught and I reject it based upon it being non-scriptural and frought with error.
3. Do not belong to, or attend catholic services any more.

Will I get to heaven according to the catholic church?

jason

 

Jason,

Before I answer your question, I need to know the answer to this:

Do you see the Church's stance on birth control as contrary to God's Word, ie, to abstain from all forms of birth control is completely contrary to the will of God? Is it an evil practice?

 

No, I see birthcontrol as a nonissue. Something to be decided by a wife and husband.

To either use or abstain from birthcontrol is not contrary to God's word or nature.

Why I think the catholic church is wrong is based upon an improper interpretation of the story of onan and a horrible, horrible history and tradition of making sex something taboo and ugly instead of something wonderful and godly to be enjoyed by a married couple.

That help?

jason

BTW. I am pretty sure I know how this will get answered

 

No, I see birthcontrol as a nonissue. Something to be decided by a wife and husband.

To either use or abstain from birthcontrol is not contrary to God's word or nature.

Why I think the catholic church is wrong is based upon an improper interpretation of the story of onan and a horrible, horrible history and tradition of making sex something taboo and ugly instead of something wonderful and godly to be enjoyed by a married couple.

That help?

jason

BTW. I am pretty sure I know how this will get answered </font>[/QUOTE]Maybe, maybe not.

First off, it is the Catholic Church which maintains the sacramental value of marriage. Second, exactly how is 100% natural sexual activity between two spouses "ugly and taboo." In the same regard, I see artificial means with the sole intention of preventing the birth of children as extremely ugly and selfish. But that's just me, just as your opinion is that of your own.

Granted, we could get on a whole tangeant here (I'm sure that's what you were hinting at), as you and I have done in the past, so I'll try and avoid that.

I do want you to be honest with me, though, and think hard and pray before you answer.

If this is not contrary to God's will, and this is what's holding you back, I question why you have the stubbornness to not submit to it. No one wants to submit to anything; that's human nature. We have selfish desires all the time, and these are the things that lead us astray. You don't want to agree with it; I understand. But that doesn't make it wrong; it just makes it hard to swallow. And it's typically the things that we have the hardest time accepting that are the things that we should be accepting.

Not trying to pick a fight here (HONESTLY); I just want to hear your thoughts on that.

God bless, and thank you for the civil debate we have going here,

Grant

 

I already did. It is a nonissue with God, so it is a nonissue with me. It neither goes against His nature, nor contradicts his word.

No, no, no. BOTH using and not using contraception is not contrary to God's will....it is a nonissue.

Why submit to something that is a nonissue? I play football and basketball, both of which are nonissues. Should I give those up as well? Should I continue? Up to me and how I feel they affect me and my walk with God.

Agreed, if this was something (using contraception) that went against God's nature (it doesn't) or against His word (it doesn't).

 

Just a reminder....some forms of contraception can/do cause a woman to abort if she becomes pregnant while taking them.

I would hope that any person professing to be Christian would at least be aware of this and avoid those forms at the very least.

LaRae

 

That's why some so-called contraceptives should be called abortives and not contraceptives.

 

Yes... the birth control pill can be used as an abortive pill instead of a birth control pill if taken improperly. Though, normal usage does not produce an abortive nature (this is a very common misconception (sorry for the pun)).

 

Jason,

There is NO misconception. Go check it out for yourself. The regular "pill" can allow a woman to become pregnant and then abort since the fetus can't attach to the lining of the uterus. It can happen when the "pill" is taken exactly how recommended.

I've done my homework on this one. You need to do yours.

LaRae

 

http://www.probe.org/docs/e-birthcontrol2.html

 

That's funny...did I mention that my wife is a doctor? Oh, did I mention that she researched this through medical journals? Oh, did I mention that she is also a Christian? Oh, did I mention that she brought this up to the CMDA (Christian Medical Dental Association) members and got all their feedback? Did I mention that we have server other christian doctor friends who also researched this (independantly) and came to the same conclusions we did (not hard when the medical community is almost unanimous in aggreement)?

Did I mention that I researched this indepenandent of her? Did I mention that I went to non-christian (re: peer reviewed scientific sources) as well as christian sites and resources (something you MUST do when researching something of scientific nature). Did I mention that I have done my homework?

Do my homework. Thanks for the advice, but I think you need to realize that there are people out there who know more about a subject than you do.

In Christ,
jason

PS This is off topic. Anyone want to answer my original quesion?

 

Jason,

A dental association? Maybe you need to look further. Also you have no way of knowing who I have contacted doing research or in fact, you know nothing about me except that I have said I am Catholic. Don't make assumptions about me.

Try talking to reproductive specialists. Talk to planned parenthood....ask them how the pill works....ask your doctor to let you read the inserts they get from the drug companies.

Here's some info you might want to check out:

http://www.epm.org/bcpill1.html

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/bc/bcfacts9.html

http://www.frontpagemag.com/cw/2000/cw05-15-00.htm

LaRae

 

No, a Christian Medical Dental Association (CMDA). An organization of Medical and Dental Professionals.

I am sorry if I insulted you with the insinuation that you didn't do any research. Though, I will stand by my statement that I have done mine, and my remarks were in response to your hostile and derogatory statements. You further debase your own position by not reading the post (the 'dental assocation' comment for one) and suggesting I look further when it is obvious from my previous post that the methods employed were far more than adequite for research.

Wow...again, you think I haven't done this (assumptions what?). The great thing about having a doctor wife and being part of that 'dental assocation' is that they know where to look and what to look for.

Link 1. You need to look at scientific and non-christian sites and resources to get the whole picture. I can't stress this enough. If you don't, especially when it comes to scientific matters, you are left following someone else's notions.

For instance, I could show you a site that says we found noah's ark. Did we? No we didn't. Just because a site says something, doesn't make it true.

Link 2. Does nothing to support your position.

Link 3. Wouldn't load, can't critique.

AGAIN. This is off topic. Someone want to answer my original question?

[ September 24, 2002, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: jasonW* ]