Home More advice Religion, Spirituality & Folklore
Why do Catholics baptize babies?I can't find anything inthe bible to back this practice and I would like to know where it came from.
"First of all let me let me tell you that if go out into broad daylight and close your eyes, the world does not become dark. I am confident that you don't understand the truth of Christianity. If you did you would be a Christian. "
I was a christian, and I learned the truth. That is why I no longer am one.
"The Bible is authenticated by the 24,000+ manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today. The earliest of these copies are written within 25 years of the said time. "
You can not use the bible, or even earlier manuscipts, as proof he existed.
"Secondly writings of Josephus (AD 37?-101?, a Jewish historian), Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian), Thallus (Circa AD 52), Lucian (circa 120-after 180) mentions Jesus. Details of other people and places in th Bible are also mentioned. The writings of these historians are evidences that Jesus did exist."
Josephus has been roundly dismissed. His writings were later edited, or actually forged by chistian scribes. This has been proven. He did mention a man named jesus but nothing other than repeating what was being said about him by others. It is still not evidence he existed. None of these writings are independent accounts of anyone named jesus. There is no record of his trial or execution from roman or hebrew sources. There is no record of his existence at all during the time he lived. I do happen to think that, just like most legends, the jesus myth is based on a real person. But there is no real proof he existed other than the accounts of his followers, or third person accounts given by his followers.
"Finally as I mentioned before (and many people don't agree to this) the Bible itself is an evidence for Jesus' existence and His work. People like to call this circular reasoning. It is in fact not one because the Bible is not one book. It is a collection of books written by various people assembled together. If many books about Alexander was combined to one book does it immediately make it untrustful? Therefore when I use the Bible as evidence I am comparing any book mentioning the life of Jesus. "
Alexander the great was a king, and there is much evidence of his existence from the time he was alive. There is no such evidence fore jesus. and one would not expect to find much actual records of jesus during his life, as he was not consider important at the time to be documented, like a king would. Either way, the bible is flimsy evidence at best since in depicts so many supernatural events.
"Christianity did not adopt any mythology."
Ok, so are you saying there were not many examples from pagan religions of baptism, of virgin births, of gods becoming men, of gods having human children, of god eating rituals, of execution and resurections? There are many. And now you expect people to believe that this time, with jesus, they are all true, while the others were just myth. I am not the gullible.
"Ritual is a part of worship. Baptism is not a part of worship. Nor is it needed for worship. It is just an act. "
This is one of the more idiotic statements you have made. And that is saying a lot.
Here is the very first definition of ritual from dictionary.com:
1.an established or prescribed procedure for a religious or other rite.
Please show me how babtism doesn't fit into this definition.
Now here is the first definition of baptism:
1.Ecclesiastical. a ceremonial immersion in water, or application of water, as an initiatory RITE or sacrament of the Christian church.
you do know the root word for ritual is rite. You are wrong, and I have clearly demonstrated it. But I am sure you will find some lame explanation why I you are not wrong.
"St.Peter did not start the Catholic church. How could he have when the word "Catholic" began to be used only from 106 AD? In fact he did not start any church. Nor was he the first Pope. That is a lie that the Catholic Church promoted. As I already told you there was no particular church or denomination at that time. A group of believers were called Christians."
I said he he started the christian/catholic church. So now the catholic church lies. How deep is your hatred of catholicism? The historical origins of your church come from the catholic church, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Are catholics not real christians to you?
"1. Most of the characters you pick are mythological ones - But Jesus was a real human being and there are plenty of evidences for this. "
Really, and you know this how? Prove to me a man named jesus existed other than the gospels? There is none.
"2. In cases where there are a few evidences to show that the character you have taken is a real person the miracle attributed to him is bogus (No sufficient documentation) "
And how is that any different with jesus?
"3. The miracles of Jesus is not understood properly before making a comparing Him with anyone."
What makes you think I don't understand properly the miaracles christ supposedly did? I am pretty confident in saying that I know more about christianity than you do.
"For example you made mention of the persian god mithras, saying that he was born on 25th December.First there is no evidence that he was a real human and secondly Jesus was not born the 25th of December. That is a wrong information spread by the Catholic Church. "
Wow, you really don't like catholics. Of course he wasn't born on dec 25. neither was christ. Both are mythical figures. The point was how christianity adopted old mythology into their new one.
"Another example I would like to take is your mention of the water purification example you chose. What you mentioned has nothing to do with Baptism. You make such mistakes because you have no proper understanding of what Baptism is. If you had you would not call it a ritual."
Well you have made this claim a couple of times, and have yet to explain why it is not a ritual?
"There you go again. This shows that you don't want to pay any attention to what people are posting. All you are interested in, is to keep repeating what you have said. There are many evidence outside of the Bible that Jesus actually lived. Various historical documents of various historians makes this very clear. Also there are numerous evidences for the fact that the New Testament was written in the first century. There are numerous manuscripts dating back to the first century AD. There are also outside documents showing evidences for the presence of the people and other details mentioned in the New Testament which include historical records of various historians. In fact there are more manuscripts for the Bible than there are for any other book."
Fine, show them to me.
"Also from the early copies of the old testament and the available manuscripts it clearly seen that NO EDITING was done the new testament Bible."
What does the old testament have to do with it? Have any proof there was no editing?
"Constantine's reign started around 300 AD. He was responsible for establishment of the Catholic Church. Prior to the period there were only Christians. The word Catholicism come from the Greek word "Katolikos" which means "Universal". The word was prevalent but was not used to refer to Christians. It was used thus only at the time of Constantine. There were many churches by that time and he wanted unify them. He introduced all the pagan practices into the catholic church. "
Like I said, I know far more about christianity than you do. But I find that is true with most believers. So the church that was started by Simon Peter was not the same church that came out of the council of nicaea? St. Peter, the first pope, started the christian/catholic church. At the time there was no separate christian churches. There was only one. It wasn't until later that the church splintered into different denominations. However, the niciene creed is till observed today by the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Church, Assyrian Church of the East, Eastern Catholic Churches, Lutheran Church, Anglican Churches, and almost all branches of Protestantism, including the Reformed churches, the Presbyterian Church, and the Methodist Church.
So please stop trying to paint the council of nicaea as being something solely catholic, and not really christian. And maybe you can learn some history.
You can not use the bible, or even earlier manuscipts, as proof he existed.
Why can't I? Of course I can.
Josephus has been roundly dismissed. His writings were later edited, or actually forged by chistian scribes. This has been proven. He did mention a man named jesus but nothing other than repeating what was being said about him by others. It is still not evidence he existed. None of these writings are independent accounts of anyone named jesus. There is no record of his trial or execution from roman or hebrew sources. There is no record of his existence at all during the time he lived. I do happen to think that, just like most legends, the jesus myth is based on a real person. But there is no real proof he existed other than the accounts of his followers, or third person accounts given by his followers.
You are misinformed and deluded. Only God can help you now.
Alexander the great was a king, and there is much evidence of his existence from the time he was alive. There is no such evidence fore jesus. and one would not expect to find much actual records of jesus during his life, as he was not consider important at the time to be documented, like a king would. Either way, the bible is flimsy evidence at best since in depicts so many supernatural events.
Caught the wrong point again. You don't want Jesus around and this has blinder your sight.
Ok, so are you saying there were not many examples from pagan religions of baptism, of virgin births, of gods becoming men, of gods having human children, of god eating rituals, of execution and resurections? There are many. And now you expect people to believe that this time, with jesus, they are all true, while the others were just myth. I am not the gullible.
That is why I said you don't understand Christianity. There is no point in pointing out anything to you when you won't look in that direction.
1.Ecclesiastical. a ceremonial immersion in water, or application of water, as an initiatory RITE or sacrament of the Christian church. you do know the root word for ritual is rite. You are wrong, and I have clearly demonstrated it. But I am sure you will find some lame explanation why I you are not wrong.
Show that you don't understand what Baptism is. First find out what Baptism is.
*** I said he he started the christian/catholic church. So now the catholic church lies. How deep is your hatred of catholicism? The historical origins of your church come from the catholic church, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Are catholics not real christians to you?***
How do you know weather I hate Catholicism or not? It shows that you can only attach negativity to anything. I don't hate anything but sin. I was a catholic myself until recently. There is nothing called a "Christian/Catholic" church. There was only the Christian Church. And let me also make this truth statement even though it may sound very offensive. Yes Catholics are not Christians. Christians are those who follow Jesus Christ and the Bible which is the Word of God. Catholicism doesn't do that.
...of the said time? Who's telling you this information? The oldest known document that could POTENTIALLY be a manuscript, is a FRAGMENT of the book of John, from between 110 and 125 A.D. The earliest ''nearly complete'' New Testament TRANSCRIPTS are from 325-350 A.D.
Absolutely wrong information. The original text of the New testament is not available. It is said to have destroyed when Jerusalem was attacked in 70 AD. But God retained the copies which were accessible to many at that time. The early church fathers who had these documents often quoted from these documents in their writings. There are these and many other proper evidences for the authenticity of the Bible.
Really, and you know this how? Prove to me a man named jesus existed other than the gospels? There is none. And how is that any different with jesus? What makes you think I don't understand properly the miaracles christ supposedly did? I am pretty confident in saying that I know more about christianity than you do. Fine, show them to me. What does the old testament have to do with it? Have any proof there was no editing?
First of all let me let me tell you that if go out into broad daylight and close your eyes, the world does not become dark. I am confident that you don't understand the truth of Christianity. If you did you would be a Christian.
The Bible is authenticated by the 24,000+ manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today. The earliest of these copies are written within 25 years of the said time.
Secondly writings of Josephus (AD 37?-101?, a Jewish historian), Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian), Thallus (Circa AD 52), Lucian (circa 120-after 180) mentions Jesus. Details of other people and places in th Bible are also mentioned. The writings of these historians are evidences that Jesus did exist.
Finally as I mentioned before (and many people don't agree to this) the Bible itself is an evidence for Jesus' existence and His work. People like to call this circular reasoning. It is in fact not one because the Bible is not one book. It is a collection of books written by various people assembled together. If many books about Alexander was combined to one book does it immediately make it untrustful? Therefore when I use the Bible as evidence I am comparing any book mentioning the life of Jesus.
From the earliest of the manuscripts that are available today it can be found that no editing has been done.
Wow, you really don't like catholics. Of course he wasn't born on dec 25. neither was christ. Both are mythical figures. The point was how christianity adopted old mythology into their new one.
Christianity did not adopt any mythology.
Well you have made this claim a couple of times, and have yet to explain why it is not a ritual?
Ritual is a part of worship. Baptism is not a part of worship. Nor is it needed for worship. It is just an act.
**Like I said, I know far more about christianity than you do. But I find that is true with most believers. So the church that was started by Simon Peter was not the same church that came out of the council of nicaea? St. Peter, the first pope, started the christian/catholic church. At the time there was no separate christian churches. There was only one. It wasn't until later that the church splintered into different denominations. However, the niciene creed is till observed today by the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Church, Assyrian Church of the East, Eastern Catholic Churches, Lutheran Church, Anglican Churches, and almost all branches of Protestantism, including the Reformed churches, the Presbyterian Church, and the Methodist Church. **
Well you do not know much about Christianity. Please correct your misunderstanding about this.
St.Peter did not start the Catholic church. How could he have when the word "Catholic" began to be used only from 106 AD? In fact he did not start any church. Nor was he the first Pope. That is a lie that the Catholic Church promoted. As I already told you there was no particular church or denomination at that time. A group of believers were called Christians.
" You can not use the bible, or even earlier manuscipts, as proof he existed.
Why can't I? Of course I can. "
It is only evidence, not proof. And not very reliable evidence since it is written by people with an agenda to make jesus into a god. My only point is that there is no PROOF he existed. But it would not be surprising for there to be no record of someone who would be considered insignificant at the time.
"Caught the wrong point again. You don't want Jesus around and this has blinder your sight."
Huh? Why would I not want jesus around? Why would I even care? So what was the point if I didn't catch it?
"That is why I said you don't understand Christianity. There is no point in pointing out anything to you when you won't look in that direction. "
Nice dodge. Still didn't answer the question. I understand christianity better than you do. I have looked at it from all directions, and that is how I have come to the realization that it is mythology. You have refused to look at real accepted science simply because it doesn't jive with your preconceived notions of our origins.
"Show that you don't understand what Baptism is. First find out what Baptism is. "
First you tell me I don't know what baptism and say "Baptism is not a ritual". Then I show you the definition of baptism where it is desrcibed as a ritual, and then you have the balls to still say that I don't understand what it is. I was baptized, my kids have been baptized, I have been a godparent at baptisms. I know exactly what it is. Just because I don't believe the same thing as you, doesn't mean I don't understand it.
"How do you know weather I hate Catholicism or not? It shows that you can only attach negativity to anything. I don't hate anything but sin. I was a catholic myself until recently. There is nothing called a "Christian/Catholic" church. There was only the Christian Church. And let me also make this truth statement even though it may sound very offensive. Yes Catholics are not Christians. Christians are those who follow Jesus Christ and the Bible which is the Word of God. Catholicism doesn't do that. "
Really? That would come as a suprise to catholics. I seriously doubt you have ever been in a catholic church if you can actually say that they don't follow christ and the bible.
Again, here is the first definition of christianity from dictionary.com:
1.the Christian religion, including the Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox churches.
It is even listed first, since it is by far the largest CHRISTIAN denomination in the world.
ALL chrisitan religions stem from catholicism. You should learn your history. No matter how much you want to separate yourself from catholicism, you can not. It is the original christianity. What bugs you about catholics? The fact that they don't believe in the mythology of creationism?
I didn't think your credibility could sink any lower, but you keep surprising me.
"I was talking about rituals. Christians are not supposed to follow any rituals. Baptism is not a ritual but a way of showing people that one has repented of their sins. jimahl tends to get mixed up with Catholic practices and Christian practices. Also it is a myth that virgin birth, death on cross, resurrection etc are found in older cultures. The idea that these existed in other old mythology came about in the AD's. "
Not only do you know nothing of evolution, you know nothing of history either. Baptism is not a ritual? What the hell is it then? I am not at all confused. All christianity recognizes the virgin birth, baptism, the resurection, the eucharist, miracles christ did, the appostles. All of them pagan in origin.
Here are just a few examples to prove you wrong.
The persian god Mithras was born of a virgin on December 25th, called The Redeemer, and Mithra's temple in Rome had a sign saying: "And thou hast saved us by shedding the eternal blood." Another inscription to Mithras reads: "He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made one with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."
Pagan water purification rituals were used in the archaic Near East and are written about in the Old Testament. Homer mentions the washing of hands before prayer, and the purification of an entire army with water. The Greeks even had priests, kathartai, who specialized in purification with water.
The passion of Baal or Bel of Phoenicia/Babylon, as revealed on a 4000-year-old tablet now in the British Museum. Baal is taken prisoner and tried in a hall of justice; he is tormented and mocked by a rabble; he is led away to the mount; he is taken with two other prisoners, one of whom is released; after he has been sacrificed on the mount, the rabble goes on a rampage; his clothes are taken; he disappears into a tomb; he is sought after by weeping women; he is resurrected, appearing to his followers after the stone is rolled away from the tomb.
Romulus is described as the Son of God, born of a virgin. Dionysus turned water into wine. Apollonius of Tyana uses magic words to raise a girl from death.
There are hundreds of examples.
And where do you get this information? From the new testament. You can't use anything from the bible as proof the bible was written or edited before constantine.
Prove it. No gospel was actually written while christ lived (if he ever actually did). At the concil of nicaea, they determined which gospels would be included and which ones weren't. And it is obvious from all the pagam imagery included, that it was also edited at that time to make it acceptable to pagans to convert.
There you go again. This shows that you don't want to pay any attention to what people are posting. All you are interested in, is to keep repeating what you have said. There are many evidence outside of the Bible that Jesus actually lived. Various historical documents of various historians makes this very clear. Also there are numerous evidences for the fact that the New Testament was written in the first century. There are numerous manuscripts dating back to the first century AD. There are also outside documents showing evidences for the presence of the people and other details mentioned in the New Testament which include historical records of various historians. In fact there are more manuscripts for the Bible than there are for any other book.
Also from the early copies of the old testament and the available manuscripts it clearly seen that NO EDITING was done the new testament Bible.
And all christians belonged to the catholic church up until the great schism. All of the customs and beliefs were codified by constantine, and did not exist prior to the 4th century.
Constantine's reign started around 300 AD. He was responsible for establishment of the Catholic Church. Prior to the period there were only Christians. The word Catholicism come from the Greek word "Katolikos" which means "Universal". The word was prevalent but was not used to refer to Christians. It was used thus only at the time of Constantine. There were many churches by that time and he wanted unify them. He introduced all the pagan practices into the catholic church.
I was talking about rituals. Christians are not supposed to follow any rituals. Baptism is not a ritual but a way of showing people that one has repented of their sins. jimahl tends to get mixed up with Catholic practices and Christian practices. Also it is a myth that virgin birth, death on cross, resurrection etc are found in older cultures. The idea that these existed in other old mythology came about in the AD's.
**To most he was just a prohpet, not a god. **
No, Jesus himself claimed that he was the son of God and so did all the other Apostles.
Of course they did, who else wrote it. At the time the new testament was compiled and edited (at the counil of nicaea), the only christianity that existed was the catholic church. This was long before the great schism and the reformation. You really need to learn something about history.
The New Testament was written by various people living at the time of Jesus and not by the Catholic Church. Please get your history right. Biblically the people who believed in Jesus Christ were called Christians and a group of Christians were referred to as the Church. Later on when the Catholic Church came into existence and gained power they were the Church and changed the Biblical meaning of the word.
That would be 1st Cor 15:29 which talks about baptism for the dead. And if mormons aren't christians then why is they're church called the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Also Christ says in John 3:3-5 it says that baptism is essential for salvation.
What is mentioned in this verse seem to refer to a practice that prevalent among the people of Corinth. Paul just mentions it to make a point but does not endorse it. Just naming a Church of Jesus Christ does not make it a Christian church. The verse in John 3:3-5 does not refer to water baptism. It refers to our natural birth.
"The Catholic church wrote the New Testament. So, since the Catholic church sees itself as more authoritative than the Bible, they are free to do things not found in the Bible.
Yes this is how the catholic church works. They wrongly assume that they are the ones who wrote the New Testament."
Of course they did, who else wrote it. At the time the new testament was compiled and edited (at the counil of nicaea), the only christianity that existed was the catholic church. This was long before the great schism and the reformation. You really need to learn something about history.
"Baptism, like all things christian, is all based on earier pagan practices.
You are partially correct. All things in the Catholic Church are based on pagan practices. Christianity is not supposed to have any rituals.
*mamak, christianity has very few rituals passed down from judeism. All their rituals and holidays are based on pagan religions. **
That is not true of Christianity but it is true of Catholicism."
Have a bit of anti-catholicism there, huh? Are you saying that non-catholic christians don't think christ was born as a result of a virgin birth? Or that he was the son of god? Or that he was baptized by john? Or in the body and blood of christ? Or even in the resurection? Do they celebrate christmas in December? Do they celebrate easter on a date derived from Lunar cycles? All of these myths existed in pagan religions long before christ. Prior to the council of nicaea, the divinity of christ was not believed by all christians. To most he was just a prohpet, not a god. But constantine needed to make it sound enticing for the pagans to convert, so he made the new religion sound not so different from their old one.
ahhh, the things christians dont realize...
**1. cleans them of orignial sin ** they baptize the babies so that they are born into the church and if they die there soul will go straight to heaven it also cleans them of original sin.
There is nothing called the original sin. This is one of those things cooked up by the catholic church. A baby is not sinful and if a baby dies it is not sent to hell.
The Catholic church wrote the New Testament. So, since the Catholic church sees itself as more authoritative than the Bible, they are free to do things not found in the Bible.
Yes this is how the catholic church works. They wrongly assume that they are the ones who wrote the New Testament.
As a curious asside, 1 Cor. 15 discusses baptism for the dead...a rather bizarre idea no longer practiced, but nonetheless Biblical.
Could you indicate some verses that talk about baptism for the dead?
Baptism, like all things christian, is all based on earier pagan practices.
You are partially correct. All things in the Catholic Church are based on pagan practices. Christianity is not supposed to have any rituals.
*mamak, christianity has very few rituals passed down from judeism. All their rituals and holidays are based on pagan religions. **
That is not true of Christianity but it is true of Catholicism.
The LDS church or the mormons practice baptism for the dead. and if you really think about it, it totally makes sense, if you are supposed to be baptized to be saved God would give those people who never got the chance to hear the gospel and second shot at it.
Mormons cannot be termed as Christians. We need to stop taking examples form them. Water Baptism is not an essential thing for salvation. Salvation is through Jesus Christ and is not dependent on any ritual.
"No, Jesus himself claimed that he was the son of God and so did all the other Apostles."
And where do you get this information? From the new testament. You can't use anything from the bible as proof the bible was written or edited before constantine. They like saying I can prove that Tolkien's middle earth is real because the origns of the world are described in the books?
"The New Testament was written by various people living at the time of Jesus and not by the Catholic Church."
Prove it. No gospel was actually written while christ lived (if he ever actually did). At the concil of nicaea, they determined which gospels would be included and which ones weren't. And it is obvious from all the pagam imagery included, that it was also edited at that time to make it acceptable to pagans to convert.
"Please get your history right. Biblically the people who believed in Jesus Christ were called Christians and a group of Christians were referred to as the Church. Later on when the Catholic Church came into existence and gained power they were the Church and changed the Biblical meaning of the word."
And all christians belonged to the catholic church up until the great schism. All of the customs and beliefs were codified by constantine, and did not exist prior to the 4th century.
Well these are some of the very stale arguments that many ignorant people latch on to. Those who use there arguments do not know what they are talking about. The problems with these type of arguments are
For example you made mention of the persian god mithras, saying that he was born on 25th December.First there is no evidence that he was a real human and secondly Jesus was not born the 25th of December. That is a wrong information spread by the Catholic Church.
Another example I would like to take is your mention of the water purification example you chose. What you mentioned has nothing to do with Baptism. You make such mistakes because you have no proper understanding of what Baptism is. If you had you would not call it a ritual.
Well I don't believe that I do more than what the Bible teaches or add anything. The Catholic Church has Judaic traditions. Who was Jesus born to? Jewish people. So our traditions are not just Chrisian but Jewish belief. The old testament is Jewish and new is Christian founded by Christ. So if our way of ritualism is not something you understand I hope I layed a foundation for you to grasp where we got some of our ways. Baptism is a ritual where the water is to "cleanse" you. Otherwise we wouldn't use water. In old Jewish times when you walked into a home you were greeted with water to cleanse you of any dirt. This is same as Muslims. In church we use it because we choose to symbolicize being cleansed when entering the home of God (sign of respect). So to say it was born of pagan origin is incorrect.
I hope I have well informed you and helped to clear your misunderstanding of why we do what we do.
mamak, christianity has very few rituals passed down from judeism. All their rituals and holidays are based on pagan religions. In the 4th century when the roman emperor constantine saw the writing on the wall that chrisitianity was growing and he couldn't stop it, he decided to jump on the band wagon and convert all of rome. So in order to make chrisitianity more attrractive to the pagans he baisicly editied the many gospels of the time and put them togeather to make new testament. But he made sure it included a lot of pagan dogma, like virigin birth, baptism, god becoming man, god eating rituals, resurection. It is all copied from the pagans. Even xmas and easter are based on pagan holidays.
And you have no need to inform me. I probably know far more about your own religion than you do. I was raised catholic and did 8 years of parochial school, but learned the truth on my own.
The Catholic church wrote the New Testament. As a result, they see themselves rather than the Bible as the ultimate authority.
Protestants have to disagree with that, or else they would be Catholic. So Protestants insist the Bible is the authority. Both can't be right, but both can be wrong.
So, since the Catholic church sees itself as more authoritative than the Bible, they are free to do things not found in the Bible.
As a curious asside, 1 Cor. 15 discusses baptism for the dead...a rather bizarre idea no longer practiced, but nonetheless Biblical.
The Bible is authenticated by the 24,000+ manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today. The earliest of these copies are written within 25 years of the said time.
...of the said time? Who's telling you this information? The oldest known document that could POTENTIALLY be a manuscript, is a FRAGMENT of the book of John, from between 110 and 125 A.D. The earliest ''nearly complete'' New Testament TRANSCRIPTS are from 325-350 A.D.
Hey toadaly you mentioned baptism for the dead. however what you said is only half right baptism for the dead is biblical, but as far as it not being practiced anymore you're wrong. The LDS church or the mormons practice baptism for the dead. and if you really think about it, it totally makes sense, if you are supposed to be baptized to be saved God would give those people who never got the chance to hear the gospel and second shot at it.
No, G-d would not send babies to hell if they were not baptised. Baptism was a symbolic gesture, kind of like a commitment. The babies were born with sin however they are not guilty of sin because they dont know right from wrong. After all it was Yeshua who said that no son shall pay for the sin's of the father. Meaning that G-d will not judge you on what your parents did. G-d bless.
Well said "ashlyn elizabeth". We are not sinful as babies but we carry original sin as our parents are not free of sin. I'm sure a baby would be fine getting into heaven. We like to proclaim our offspring Catholic and as children of God. So yes, it is initiation into the Catholic faith. It's part of Catholic living and our sacraments.
That would be 1st Cor 15:29 which talks about baptism for the dead. And if mormons aren't christians then why is they're church called the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Also Christ says in John 3:3-5 it says that baptism is essential for salvation.
Absolutely wrong information...
No... I'm right... But nice bullshit answer... God had them. Right. Is that really ALL you can come up with? ...you've provided ZERO evidence for ANY authenticity...
My mother said it was in case the baby dies they would go to heaven since we are born with sin. I don't know where it came from. They have different beliefs than many..
they baptize the babies so that they are born into the church and if they die there soul will go straight to heaven it also cleans them of original sin.
Hi Mygringa,
You wrote: '...they [Catholic people] have different beliefs than many..' Do not all people have different believes than most..?
Baptism, like all things christian, is all based on earier pagan practices.
It's cleans your soul of all sins, and it brings you to the church.
