The Creed We Need

my friend, unless you know already what the Apostolic Faith is, you can’t measure any written book to determine if it is Scripture or not. without the witness of the Church testifying that these books convey the same faith it received from the Apostles, you would have no clue. thank God He left us a Church led by the Holy Spirit that has the authority to declare which books are Scripture and which are not.

That's just it - What you consider the 'Apostolic Faith' cannot be true, and cannot have been received as stated. What you (y'all) practice has nothing to do with the early Church whatsoever. And the closer one cares to take the Roman edifice toward that early Church, the more laughable it becomes.

There is *no part* of it that follows the way of Yeshua, which is why it needs a tradition to explain it's modifications... But in the modifications themselves, it is proven to be the wrong way. Structurally it is unsound, which is why I went looking in the first place. If it is unfounded, which it is, then all of it's authority must indeed have been usurped, or it's authority must be proven to come from Yeshua, which it cannot be.

Hence my need to take an earnest look to examine the foundations thereof, to include the 'canon'. Authority claimed by right must necessarily have a pedigree. And that pedigree is wholly missing, outside of it's own invention.

Debating Catholics about baptism or any other doctrine is rather a waste of time it seems to me. No matter what they believe they counter what the RCC has published and renowned Catholics have stated.

First they say that no one is saved outside of the RCC.

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam: “We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” — Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (Promulgated November 18, 1302) http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/b8-unam.html

And then we hear from those on this forum that those outside the RCC are not saved but their own “church” says this.

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers. . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

But then we see this from them.

847 Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

So not only don’t they need to be baptized to be saved but they don’t even need to know Jesus! Of course we have the declaration from the RCC that Catholics and Muslims serve the same God.

CCC841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day.

Of course with that attitude one can understand the statement by mother Theresa that most any religion is just fine.

"If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, a better Catholic, a better whatever we are. ... What God is in your mind you must accept" (from Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work , by Desmond Doig, p. 156, as quoted by Dave Hunt, Global Peace and the Rise of Antichrist , p. 149).

So like I said, having a discussion with Catholics as to what they believe is rather useless.

>> when backed into a corner without further ability to defend a position<<

Nah, like I said in my last post. When a group doesn’t even believe that it’s necessary to know Jesus to be saved or that one can be saved in most any religion there isn’t much sense in discussing what the word of God actually says with them.

Yep, you have convinced me of what you believe and far be it from me to attempt to change that.

>> I have not once used anything other than Scripture to explain the true meaning of baptism.<<

Yep, you used it all right. But then so do Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and many others.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.