Is it necessary to be baptized as an adult, if you were baptized as a baby?

[Stalwart]

And also the root words from which they are derived are different.

Correct. We simply cannot understand sacred scripture fully in its English translations. Greek is far more intricate. Doesn't the Greek word for 'love' have four different meanings, or something like that?

Anyway. Sola Scriptura is self-defeating. Sola Scriptura applied in the English context is simply absurd.

 

[Stalwart]

Been there, tried that. A poof?

By knowingly and consciously denouncing the faith, you have separated yourself from the Body of Christ anyway, so it really doesn't matter if you're on a parish register.

A poof is a homosexual. If you're actively seeking to retreat from the visible institution which has, historically, functioned in an exceedingly masculine manner - providing the basis for the formation of western/European civilisation, propagating values of moral fortitude, and constituting the driving force behind western philosophy - I can only presume that you are coming to see yourself as one.

 

[metis]

Correct. We simply cannot understand sacred scripture fully in its English translations. Greek is far more intricate. Doesn't the Greek word for 'love' have four different meanings, or something like that?

Anyway. Sola Scriptura is self-defeating. Sola Scriptura applied in the English context is simply absurd.

Plus Sola Scriptura was not used in the early church.

 

[Kemosloby]

No, not quite. Matthew 23:9, translated to English, most appropriately reads:

And call none your father upon earth; for one is your father, who is in heaven.

There are three paternal ranks: Biological, Spiritual, and Heavenly. We address clerics, who function in persona Christi, as our leaders in the faith, and thereby as our spiritual fathers. We do not address any man or thing as heavenly father. The Apostle Paul refers to Timothy as his son twice - does this not make him Timothy's father in a sense?

Timothy never called Paul Father. But I'll give Paul some slack since by miracle he was ordained to create the scriptures that we read as scripture. So with Christ in heaven working directly through Paul, he was in essence a spiritual father. But for everyone else they say let no one teach differently than they taught. Did scripture come to us through any pope or any of his priests? No, they are not fathers.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

A poof is a homosexual. If you're actively seeking to retreat from the visible institution which has, historically, functioned in an exceedingly masculine manner - providing the basis for the formation of western/European civilisation, propagating values of moral fortitude, and constituting the driving force behind western philosophy - I can only presume that you are coming to see yourself as one.

You presume very wrong. (one doesn't "become" a homosexual anyways, but that's another topic entirely.)

I am simply not a Catholic - not even a Christian - anymore, and no longer wish to have any ties to the church, registry or otherwise.

 

[Kemosloby]

Many churches recognize "apostolic succession" as they should be cause it is both scriptural (as found in Acts and many of the epistles, although not using those same words) and historical. However, you should use "catholic church" in lower case because the CC is not the only church that recognizes this reality. If you can't recognize it, then it's not the Protestant minister that is missing something.

Perhaps the protestant minister saw himself equal to an Apostle too. I did get the impression he thought himself equal to Paul, which made me gag a little, Once again the Catholics and others exploiting, obscure and ambiguous meaning to ordain themselves. Their egos run away with them. The qualifications to be an Apostle were that you had to be one who witnessed his death and resurrection. Therefore Apostolic succession is impossible. So you had 12 Apostles who Jesus taught himself, and Paul who was ordained by miracle.

 

[Stalwart]

Timothy never called Paul Father. But I'll give Paul some slack since by miracle he was ordained to create the scriptures that we read as scripture. So with Christ in heaven working directly through Paul, he was in essence a spiritual father. But for everyone else they say let no one teach differently than they taught. Did scripture come to us through any pope or any of his priests? No, they are not fathers.

So it's totally arbitrary and subjective? You, personally, get to decide where Law does and does not apply? Pull your head in. You have no authority.

Actually, yes, scripture was 'given to us' by a pope and bishops - the Bible was created by the Church, for the Church. It is a Church document, divinely inspired by God Himself, scribed by holy men, whose successors exist today, occupying the same Apostolic office. The Bible did not exist for centuries after the death of Christ - the Church and Her Sacred Tradition - that is, the oral teaching of Christ and His Apostles - was, and still is, the foundation of the Christian faith. The Bible was assembled in order to aid in the communication of the Gospel, which is found equally in both scriptural writing and oral tradition.

 

[Stalwart]

You presume very wrong. (one doesn't "become" a homosexual anyways, but that's another topic entirely.)

I am simply not a Catholic - not even a Christian - anymore, and no longer wish to have any ties to the church, registry or otherwise.

Yeah, okay, whatever you say. What draws you to 'paganism'? Do you think the romanticised notion of nigh-animalistic snow- and forest-dwelling barbarians is something to aspire to? Are you an ethnonationalist who subscribes to this idea of Christianity being a mechanic of Jewish subversion (despite its inherently anti-Jewish stance...), or are you just a militant atheist/ignoramus?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I've really no interest to discuss what I hold to be sacred with someone who's so willing to make errant and offensive assumptions of others.

 

[Stalwart]

I've really no interest to discuss what I hold to be sacred with someone who's so willing to make errant and offensive assumptions of others.

You're offended by words? Pitiful.

 

[Kemosloby]

So it's totally arbitrary and subjective? You, personally, get to decide where Law does and does not apply? Pull your head in. You have no authority.

Actually, yes, scripture was 'given to us' by a pope and bishops - the Bible was created by the Church, for the Church. It is a Church document, divinely inspired by God Himself, scribed by holy men, whose successors exist today, occupying the same Apostolic office. The Bible did not exist for centuries after the death of Christ - the Church and Her Sacred Tradition - that is, the oral teaching of Christ and His Apostles - was, and still is, the foundation of the Christian faith. The Bible was assembled in order to aid in the communication of the Gospel, which is found equally in both scriptural writing and oral tradition.

The gospel of Jesus isn't a law, it's spiritual for those who "get it".

 

[Stalwart]

The gospel of Jesus isn't a law, it's spiritual for those who "get it".

If you conform to the Gospel - the commands of Christ - then you conform to God's Law. Being subject to the Apostles is necessary to this.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

You're offended by words? Pitiful.

Whether or not I am offended is irrelevant; you meant for it to be so. Why bother to discuss with such a person?

 

[Stalwart]

Whether or not I am offended is irrelevant; you meant for it to be so. Why bother to discuss with such a person?

For your own good, because you are under some kind of delusion which demands correction.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Whatever helps you affirm your belief, buddy.

 

[Kemosloby]

If you conform to the Gospel - the commands of Christ - then you conform to God's Law. Being subject to the Apostles is necessary to this.

The pope isn't an Apostle and the Apostles weren't popes. The Apostles were the 12 who Jesus chose and Paul who was chosen by miracle.

 

[Stalwart]

The pope isn't an Apostle and the Apostles weren't popes. The Apostles were the 12 who Jesus chose and Paul who was chosen by miracle.

Then why did they appoint successors for themselves?

 

[Kemosloby]

If you conform to the Gospel - the commands of Christ - then you conform to God's Law. Being subject to the Apostles is necessary to this.

Romans 7:6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

 

[Stalwart]

Romans 7:6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

Christ came to fulfil the Law, not abolish it. It has been changed, not made redundant. Did Christ not command us and His disciples of many things throughout the Gospel - and did his Apostles not do the same throughout the New Testament, on His authority, informed by His oral tradition communicated to them?

To follow Christ is to be Law-abiding; to submit totally to Him.

 

[Kemosloby]

Then why did they appoint successors for themselves?

Where in the bible did they appoint successors to be new Apostles? The only Apostle to succeed anyone was the replacement for Judas.