True Marriage Needs No Show Money

In the Catholic Church, marriage officiated by Catholic authorities is the only one acknowledged. Civil marriage is considered invalid.

Sacraments 101: Matrimony (2:00) 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq2RDYlOLrs

According to them “civil marriage” is not a true marriage.

While applicants do not pay for civil marriage, the Catholic Church requires a fee for their official marriage that makes it biblically invalid. As Catholic authorities invalidate civil marriage, the Bible in turn invalidates their official marriage. How?

II CORINTHIANS 11:7 

Have I committed an offense in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely?

Everything sacred in the Bible must be given without payment. When it is paid, it loses its sanctity. The Bible gives many examples that should be given free since inherently the power to do it comes from God.

MATTHEW 10:8 

Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

True marriage was instituted by God Himself. And everything that comes from God must not be sold or be paid for.

PROVERBS 23:23
Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding.

Can a marriage paid for with a considerable amount of money be better and more binding than the free and divinely instituted marriage taught by the Bible? Let us examine!

Marriage or giving a man a “help meet for him” was originally instituted by the Creator with the purpose of procreating a godly seed.

GENESIS 2:18, 21-24 

18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him. 

21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 

22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

GENESIS 1:27-28 

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

MALACHI 2:15 

And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.

The first marriage, which is of the first man and woman, does not carry with it conditions, prerequisites, and prohibitions in contrast to later divine marriages.

HEBREWS 13:4
Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

While later marriages have many do’s and don’ts, the first divinely instituted marriage emphasized only on “be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth.” Be fruitful means the couple, Adam and Eve, have to continuously reproduce their kind, while to multiply is to teach all of their offspring to do the same.

Multiplication cannot be attained without a multiplicand and a multiplier. The first couple served as the multiplicand while their offspring served as the multiplier, and the fruits of the multipliers serve as the products to fill the earth! It is in the intent of producing and multiplying of “godly seeds” that God instituted marriage. Same sex marriages cannot do so. Whosoever or whichever government or body that approved of same sex marriage, practically did not consider the divine intention of marriage.

There is a host of great things that a divinely instituted marriage can produce. From the physical, mental, and spiritual side of life, the marriage initiated by the Creator is unparalleled by any marriage invented by man!

Physically, kissing to the opposite sexes boosts their health and promotes their intimacy. Here’s an excerpt from an article written by Dr. David. E. Bratt of The Trinidad Guardian (4/13/2004).

The excerpt underscores the wonderful effect of kissing on hormones called oxytocin or the love hormone. The author also mentioned what kissing does to release adrenaline and dopamine, both resulting in feelings of pleasure.

There are also health benefits of sex in marriage. Take note that whenever marriage is mentioned, the universal meaning is the one referred to in the Bible - the heterosexual union – of man and wife that God had intended. It is not the one where a Catholic priest has become the symbol and where money is the enabler for the ceremony.

Here’s an excerpt from an article written by Carol Wagstaff of Christian ExaminerDotCom (9/4/2008) about needing to support [heterosexual] marriages -

Men and women who unite themselves to each other in a loving marriage have better heart health, healthier lifestyles and fewer emotional problems. Men and women who are happily married experience greater fulfillment and well-being than their single, divorced or widowed friends.

Having a partner in life is way advantageous in facing challenges. Even the Bible says for two are better than one.

ECCLESIASTES 4:9-11
9 Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labor.
10 For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to him that is alone when he falleth; for he hath not another to help him up.
11 Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm alone?

Biblically and psychologically, having a faithful sexual partner is like having another “you” that is perfectly consoling.

MATTHEW 19:6
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Wisely speaking, a partner should not be considered “a better half” but a “better self.”

The Greek word used in the English translation “joined together” is:

G4347
προσκολλάω
proskollaō
pros-kol-lay'-o
From G4314 and G2853; to glue to, that is, (figuratively) to adhere: - cleave, join (self). What seals and glue the twain to be one is the power of the Creator.

MATTHEW 19:5
And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave (proskollaō) to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh.

“What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” But how does God join or glue a man and a woman together?

THE ROMANS 7:2
For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

In our dispensation, it is the law of Christ that obtains -not Moses’ law.

THE ACTS 13:39
And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

GALATIANS 6:2
Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.

The law is for those under the law.

THE ROMANS 3:19
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

Back to the RCC not recognizing civil marriage, here’s a National Catholic Reporter that get’s stunned. Michael Sean Winters in “Pope Francis and Civil Marriage for Catholics” (1/14/2014) wrote -

My colleague John Allen reported yesterday on the fact that the Holy Father baptized the child of a couple who had contracted a civil marriage. And, as Allen notes, this is a pretty stunning development, one that, as I see it, entails several key issues of increasing depth and significance.

First, there is the strange canonical situation of Catholics who do not marry in the Church. Those marriages are not only considered illicit, but invalid. This has never made sense to me.

Marriage understandably concerns two people (a man and a woman) making a pact with each other with God as their judge. The laws of the land provide for civil marriages. As defined, civil marriage is a marriage performed, recorded, and recognized by a government official. Most people go for this in an effort to avoid expenses.

Since the RCC does not recognize civil marriages, does this mean some Catholic couples are actually unwed in the eyes of God?

Definitely, the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) is not under the law of Christ. No law of Christ will apply to a church inventing its own doctrines and imposing sacraments with payments and monetary considerations!

THE ROMANS 10:3
For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

Even if we do not fault the RCC for exacting toll on their members in order to get married, they are in dire straits for the following practices and tradition that they teach their people -

1. Bow down to graven images

DEUTERONOMY 5:7-9
7 Thou shalt have none other gods before me.
8 Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:
9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,

2. Impose man-made doctrines and commandments like infant baptism with fee, confirmation, the use of rosary and repetitious prayers, use of the “sign of the cross,” and the like.

MARK 7:7
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

3. Teach traditions contrary to the Bible such as: Mary being the “Queen of heaven and of the apostles,” Mary being a “Mediatrix,” “Immaculate Conception,” and many more invented honors that constitute slander against the person of the mother of the Lord Jesus and blasphemy against God!

TITUS 1:14
Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

Let us elaborate on the topic about Mary in our next issue of the blog because the Catholic’s devotion to her has drawn away the rightful worship to God.

God bless you.

EnglishPortuguêsEspañol

Read More

Spare the Children from Meaningless “Sacraments”!

From definitions, to references used, to artifacts imbued with mystical power that are all attached to money, including their so-called sacraments, the Roman Catholic Church sounds like a ball of confusion. Let us examine what they call “confirmation.” What is to be confirmed and when?

But how should we define terms first? Is it anyway we like it? A disciplined Christian would go as far back and refer to the Authority on Life and check on His words.

Notice that this source, Modern Catholic Dictionary, in defining the term, “confirmation,” arrogates unto itself the authority to redefine others. May we highlight the terms at issue for easy reading - 

“Laying on of hands” is not “confirmation,” according to the Bible. When the Lord Jesus laid His hands upon the children which action the apostles were trying to forbid, it was not a rite nor sacrament so that the apostles were even trying to prevent the children. If it were a sacrament or a religious rite, the apostles, instead of preventing the children to come close, must be assisting them! Logical?

MATTHEW 19:13-15 

13 Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. 

14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 

15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.

Again, “laying on of hands” is not “confirmation,” according to the Bible. It is the act of giving the recipient the trust and honor necessary for his God-given office.

NUMBERS 27:18-20 

18 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay thine hand upon him; 

19 And set him before Eleazar the priest, and before all the congregation; and give him a charge in their sight. 

20 And thou shalt put some of thine honor upon him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may be obedient.

It is in this very sense that the Apostle Paul laid his hands upon Timothy.

II TIMOTHY 1:6 

Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.

I TIMOTHY 4:14 

Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

You do not lay hands on children! How can such delicate trust and honor be conferred to children? Consider the age as discussed by Michelle Arnold -

Following recognition by the Holy See, the [USCCB] has decreed that the age for conferring the sacrament of confirmation in the Latin rite dioceses of the United States will be between "the age of discretion [‘considered to be about age seven’] and about sixteen years of age.’" (www.usccb.org)

This is really laughable! How can a child at seven be capable of the trust likened to what Joshua and Timothy received? Even if you say 12 or even 17, should you lay hands on them?

Here’s one of two children, both 12 year olds, that were confirmed by Pope Francis at a ceremony in St Peter’s Square in Rome (Ref: Stephen Rogers, Irish ExaminerDotCom, 4/29/2013).

The doctrine of “confirmation” that they refer to as one of their “sacraments” is one of many inventions of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). According to Catholic authorities, it is “not strictly necessary for salvation” but “there is a grave obligation to receive it in due time.” From this definition we are sure that this is an invented teaching of the Council of Trent.

Modern Catholic Dictionary Page 122

COUNCIL OF TRENT

In contrast to Catholic teachings, every teaching or commandment of Christ is essentially necessary for salvation. These are imparted to a believer by a believing preacher without costs.

JAMES 2:10 

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

While the RCC is saying that their “sacrament of confirmation is not strictly necessary for salvation,” the truth is that all the teachings of Christ and His commandments must be observed, because defiance in one will make one guilty of all.

MATTHEW 28:20 

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

And note that “all teachings” of Christ must be shared without costs! Without costs! We underscore this fact because for every movement the Catholic priests undertake, there is payment. In other words, salvation in the RCC is to be had with monetary considerations – always. The Apostles of Christ preached the gospel freely. They did not require any payment for Church services.

II CORINTHIANS 11:7 

Have I committed an offense in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely?

In contrast, the Catholic Church requires payment for their sacraments like “confirmation” and baptism. According to them “confirmation” is done in three ways: 1) Laying on of hands; 2) Anointing with chrism; and 3) Prayer. As in their other sacraments, there is again an artifact they attach so that money can be paid: Chrism. Without a Catholic bishop’s blessing, there is no consecration for a mixture in their sacraments. Show money first, then consecration comes.

Is this what the Bible says? “Anointing with chrism” is certainly not biblical. There is no such thing as “consecrated mixture of olive oil and balsam” used in any Christian rite of the first century! In its place is the strengthening of faith of one through the help of the Holy Spirit. Obviously, this is not acquired in the invented manner of the “sacrament of confirmation” of the Catholic Church!

Only one translation of the Bible in the New Testament uses the word ‘balsam’ in only one occasion when Mary used it on the feet of the Lord Jesus Christ. This clearly shows that it is not a sacred object or by any implication a “chrism” used by the 1st Century Christian church.

JOHN 11:2 (ETHERIDGE TRANSLATION) 

It was that Mariam who anointed with balsam the feet of Jeshu, and wiped (them) with her hair, whose brother this Loozar was who was sick.

Let us refer to the Bible and learn from it. Faith is the very issue when one gets baptized. Faith is also the issue with every Christian after that. It is faith that should be strengthened as one matures because faith is not a one-shot process. What will you confirm then? One’s membership in the Catholic faith?

Here are conversations that showcase what we were saying all along (Ref: Zoe Ryan, “Views conflict on what age to confirm,” National Catholic Reporter, 5/13/2011). In conflicts about what age to confirm, younger age is the restored order, Catholic authorities decided. The following excerpt outlines the issue.

We quote here two authorities: Joseph Martos and Joe Paprocki. The first is a sacramental historian and an author of two books on Catholic sacraments. The second teaches an eighth-grade confirmation class and was a director of religious education.

The gist of Martos’ comments is that children are still children. They are confirmed in early adolescence and then they stop going to church, he observes. Here’s Martos on confirmation -

We have this ceremony ... and it doesn’t occur when it’s at a real change in the person’s life…. In other words, the problem is not theological. The problem has to do with the nature and purpose of ritual, especially rites of passages and initiation rituals.

Unless people, when they’re confirmed, are actually making a passage in their life, like from being not Catholic to Catholic, not married to married ... then there isn’t any meaning in the sacrament of confirmation, because the meaning comes from what’s going on in the person’s life at the time.

Meanwhile, confirmation is more to keep them in the Catholic faith, suggests Paprocki. However, he said confirmation needs to be looked into as far as children are concerned. Here is what he said in Zoe Ryan’s interview -

I think that tends to be the biggest fear: How will we keep them if we don’t have the sacraments? The problem with that is the sacrament of confirmation shouldn’t be a carrot on a stick. It shouldn’t just be the way we keep them. If we can’t keep them without confirmation, then I think there’s something wrong there. I think it would force us to reevaluate and look more closely at what we’re offering them.”

See? Even those charged to work on children in the Catholic institutions are worried sick of what they are doing. The biblical ways by which a Christian is strengthened in faith are:

1) Through exhortation and endurance in tribulations through faith.

THE ACTS 14:22 

Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

This is affirmed by the Apostle Paul among the Romans.

THE ROMANS 5:1-5 

1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 

2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 

3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; 

4 And patience, experience; and experience, hope: 

5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

2) Through vigilance and prayer that strengthen the weaknesses of our flesh.

MATTHEW 26:41 

Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

THE ROMANS 8:26 

Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

3) Through the practice of unfeigned love that strengthens Christians.

EPHESIANS 4:16 

From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

COLOSSIANS 3:14 (RSV) 

And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony.

All these biblical ways to strengthen a Christian will not apply to a seven-year-old child! He has still some growing up to do, some experiences to undergo. The faith of a Christian is revealed by time. The Bible confirms that.

I CORINTHIANS 3:13 

Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

Time is a very important essence in the strengthening of one’s faith. One has to grow through the years as one may experience what can threaten faith, what can derail it, as well as what can strengthen it. And time may confirm again and again one’s faith as long as one holds on to the teachings of Christ.

HEBREWS 5:12
For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

For this reason, the Lord Jesus Christ tells Christians to endure until the end.

MATTHEW 10:22 

And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

How can a child of seven years experience all of these wonderful teachings of the Lord? Unless Stephen “Steve” Shott was ordained as priest when he was still seven!

More laughters to come, God willing.

Read More

A True Seeker of Truth is Ever-willing to Leave Ignorance

Ignorance can lead to wisdom, and that is wisdom even unfathomable! It is wisdom that is deep, profound, enigmatic.

But it is wisdom that is certainly not for everybody but for those who accept truth! An example is Paul’s case. He was a persecutor before of the followers of Christ. He did it in ignorance, however.

I TIMOTHY 1:13 

Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

Paul’s sincerity in learning the truth led him to know the riches of the wisdom of God. And more. God was pleased to introduce Christ to him. From there, he made up his mind not to learn from the teachings of this world. Hence, Paul’s wisdom turned exceptional and God-given!

GALATIANS 1:13-16 

13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 

14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. 

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, 

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Paul’s co-apostle, Peter, gives cognizance to this fact. The latter acknowledges that there are things hard to understand in the writings of Paul because of the kind of wisdom given to him.

II PETER 3:15-17 

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction. 

17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.

Notice that Paul calls himself the least of all saints – a mark of humility despite his wisdom. He could feel the element of mystery in such wisdom that is not openly given to just anyone at anytime.

EPHESIANS 3:8-9 

8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; 

9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

With such nature, this wonderful wisdom cannot be appreciated and comprehended by the wicked. And so what do they do? They pervert teachings from this wisdom.

This is exactly what is happening to Stephen “Steve” Shott and his peers. In the futile attempt of this Catholic priest to defend his baseless belief of baptizing infants, he asked if there is any verse forbidding infant baptism.

Here is an exchange in Twitter between Shott and a believer -

Shott implies that since there is no verse in the Bible forbidding infant baptism, the Catholic Church is correct. He also demands to be shown a command by Christ or the Apostles condemning infant baptism. As we earlier pointed out, Pope Benedict XVI declared ex cathedra that there is no Limbo after all. But Catholics still baptize their infants. It is very clear Shott prefers to ignore our argument, hence insisting on a verse.

If every prohibition is expressed in “don’ts” and “must not’s,” will man be unable to find his way? Will he not know his whereabouts? God gave common sense and logic to man. There is no excuse that he cannot find his way in this life – unless one is as willingly stupid and stubborn like Shott! 

Let’s illustrate this with God’s prohibition of eating blood. Blood is a sacred matter in the Christian faith. From the time of the Israelites it is forbidden to eat blood.

LEVITICUS 17:10 

And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.

The reason for the prohibition is this: Blood is sacred and does propitiation for the soul. It can turn away the wrath of God.

LEVITICUS 17:11 

For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Aside from its being sacred as given and described by God, we have now knowledge about the disadvantages of consuming blood for food. Here’s an excerpt from Live Science -

The strange fact is, blood, when drank, is toxic. When confined to places where blood is supposed to be — such as the heart, vessels, and so on — it is essential for life. But when ingested it's a very different story. Of course all toxins have doses, and just as a tiny bit of poison won't necessarily harm you, the more you eat or drink, the greater the danger.

Because blood is so rich in iron — and because the body has difficulty excreting excess iron — any animal that consumes blood regularly runs a risk of iron overdose. While iron is necessary for all animals (and indeed most life), in high doses it can be toxic. This condition, called haemochromatosis, can cause a wide variety of diseases and problems, including liver damage, buildup of fluid in the lungs, dehydration, low blood pressure, and nervous disorders. (Ref: http://www.livescience.com/15899-drinking-blood-safe.html)

Written by Benjamin Radford (9/02/2011), the question is about drinking blood, one may say, but Live Science underscores the effect of excess iron that can kill. Comparing bats and the human being, the latter has no mechanism that can extract too much iron from the bloodstream, the report said.

The bodies of animals that digest blood have adapted specialized digestive mechanisms. According to Katherine Ramsland in her book "The Science of Vampires" (Penguin Putnam, 2002) the vampire bat, "requires an enormous intake of iron, which helps make hemoglobin for carrying oxygen from the lungs to the body tissues. Yet the iron intake is generally higher than what the bat needs, so it has a special process for secreting the excess. When ingested, the blood goes through a tract that's adapted for extracting nutrients. Research on this system suggests that bats have a mucous membrane along the intestinal tract that acts as a barrier to prevent too much iron from getting into their bloodstreams." You, however, are not a vampire bat. Because humans did not evolve such an iron-extracting mechanism, drinking blood can kill us. (Ref: http://www.livescience.com/15899-drinking-blood-safe.html)

This wisdom can be perceived by just examining instructions given by God to His people, the Israelites.

As fats can cause a host of human ailments, logic and common sense dictate that blood also can. That is one reason it was strictly prohibited by the Lord for the Israelites through stern warnings using “don’t” and “mine” in the consumption of both!

LEVITICUS 3:17, 16 

17 It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood. 

16 And the priest shall burn them upon the altar: it is the food of the offering made by fire for a sweet savor: all the fat is the LORD's.

The Lord’s way of saying “Fat is not good for you” was expressed by these wise declarations: “The priest shall burn them” and “All the fat is the LORD’s.”

This Shott will never understand! In fact, he eats blood as if it is not prohibited for Catholics to consume such a sacred thing! Tsk! Tsk!

HEBREWS 9:22 

And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

All the blood not eaten by God’s people were shed to allegorically and rhetorically figure the importance of the redemption done by the shedding of the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ!

THE ACTS 20:28 

Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

This is the reason why up to the time of the New Testament, God through the Apostles and the Holy Spirit underscored four abstentions for God’s people: 1) From pollutions of idols; 2) From fornication; 3) From things strangled; and 4) From blood. Abstain! Refrain yourself from things unhealthy and forbidden! The Apostles were talking and from here, we can learn what a true follower of Christ must do.

THE ACTS 15:19-20, 28-29 

19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 

28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 

29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well, Fare ye well.

We don’t read “don’ts” in the preceding verses, do we? “Animals strangled” means animals that died without the blood being shed. Thus logic follows that because blood is forbidden, a strangled animal which flesh is filled with the forbidden blood is also prohibited.

Here’s another wisdom that can be appreciated in this. Animals and fowls that die without the blood being shed may not be exactly healthy and may infect the consumer. The Department of Health warns against double-dead meat.

DOH defines "botcha” or double-dead meat as a livestock or poultry that have died due to disease, slaughtered and then sold fraudulently to consumers as “fresh meat.”

In an earlier statement, DOH spokesperson Dr. Lyndon Lee-Suy said that eating double-dead meat is hazardous to health because it may result to stomachache, diarrhea and even food poisoning.

According to the DOH, double-dead meat can be spotted through its pale color with bluish or greenish-gray tint; sticky consistency; foul smell; cold (meat has been frozen); hair and skin not properly cleaned. (Ref: http://balita.ph/2015/03/03/doh-warns-on-health-risk-of-eating-double-dead-meat-during-summer/)

Back to infants, nowhere in the Bible can we find that it is prohibited for an infant or even a child to be baptized – and for that matter - to be married, as part of the sacraments of the Catholic Church. None. So, is that why you do it to them?

According to the Modern Catholic Dictionary, the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church include baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, orders, matrimony, and the anointing of the sick.

Note that these seven sacraments include baptism and matrimony. Following the senseless and stupid allegation of Shott therefore, it is rightful for him to bestow upon a baby the sacrament of matrimony! Stupidity at its pinnacle is the stupidity of Shott!

The Bible nowhere declares that you must not perform matrimony upon a child! But no normal thinking person will say “Show me in the bible that it is prohibited and I will not perform unto the child the sacrament of matrimony”.

There are admonitions without the “don’ts” and “must not’s” from where we can get wisdom.

I CORINTHIANS 7:38, 36 

38 So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better. 

36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

This is a glaring truth in the Bible but I doubt if Shott can learn anything from this!

Let me say this: “With all my heart I believe lovers and seekers of truth can comprehend the wisdom contained in this blog.”

More to come, God willing.

God bless you.

Read More

Forcing Baptism on Anyone is Not God's Way

A Catholic priest by the name of Rev. Fr. Stephen “Steve” Shott O.S.F.S. tweeted in response to questions and criticisms of his faith as follows:

Poor Stephen Shott. He doesn’t know his Bible. This is where we can see the benefit and the importance of reading the Bible!

In Matthew 28:19-20, there is no such thing as “baptize all nations”! The commandment is “teach all nations!”

MATTHEW 28:19-20 

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

It is absolutely impractical to be able to baptize a nation. A preacher of God can preach into an entire nation but never in the history of humanity, more so in Christianity, that a whole nation was baptized! It is because of acceptance of teachings that is a pre-requisite.

The Lord Jesus Christ, the most sensible preacher of all times, taught the nation of Israel His teachings but was not successful in making His entire nation accept His teachings and therefore be baptized.

Truth and reality qualify and quantify the intended meaning of a statement. The commandment “teach all nations, baptizing them” does not mean that all nations or an entire nation be baptized. The commission to teach, yes, and baptism is to follow. But there is a qualifying and quantifying truth to the intended meaning of the speaker.

The Lord Jesus Christ very well knew that not all nations and not all people of each nation would accept His teachings. So with the baptism He commanded to the apostles to be carried out. The Apostles and the disciples understood what the Lord Jesus Christ meant when He said, “baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” They will baptize only those who believed in His teachings! Here’s a story about a eunuch who merited baptism.

THE ACTS 8:36-38 

36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 

37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 

38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

Had the eunuch answered in the negative, the possibility - one hundred percent - is that Philip will not baptize him. That fact qualifies and quantifies the intended sense of the commandment!

Why are we sure biblically and logically that the baptism commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ will not be bestowed upon anyone who does not believe? Baptism signifies submission of the seeker to God’s power by his faith.

HEBREWS 11:6 

But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Why will a true preacher of God baptize a person if doing such will not please the God who sent him? Clearly, the qualifier is “faith,” the quantifier is “faith,” and the distinguisher of the age of anybody in a nation that is qualified for baptism is “faith.” A baby or an infant cannot have faith.

HEBREWS 5:13 

For every one that useth milk is unskillfull in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.

Faith comes from hearing.

THE ROMANS 10:17 

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Babies and infants have no capacity to believe or to have faith. In contrast, a grown up or a hundred-year-old man has the capacity to understand and so can believe. However, if he has no faith, he must not be baptized!

Being an adult and having the capacity to understand and to receive the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ is not enough gauge to receive baptism. He must receive them in faith in order to be baptized.

THE ROMANS 14:23 

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

If in eating a person that eats without faith is damned, will not somebody being baptized without faith being fully aware of what he is doing be damned? The answer is clear: “For whatsoever is not of faith is sin.”

What then is the age essence or limit in Matthew 28:19-20? The age of reasons where a man can, by his own free will, accept the teachings and baptism commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ!

It does not stop there, however. Baptism is just the beginning of the journey of a true Christian.

What follows after baptism? “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” After baptism follows the teaching "to observe"! A baby or an infant, even long after baptism, has not the capacity to observe or obey the laws of the Lord Jesus Christ. But what did the poor Catholic priest say?

Let’s look into more exchanges in Twitter.

It is true that teaching starts from childhood but not from “babyhood” and “infanthood.” Timothy was instructed in the Holy Scriptures from “childhood.”

II TIMOTHY 3:15 (RSV) 

and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

The mention of the term, “from childhood” can be understood from the fact that from the grandmother to the mother and to Timothy, faith dwelt.

II TIMOTHY 1:5 

When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that in thee also.

Since childhood, Timothy was being instructed by his mother and his grandmother. But one thing is sure: he was not baptized in “babyhood” or “infanthood”! He was baptized only when of age - as a reasoning adult.

This glaring truth is something that Catholic authorities cannot perceive! The mystery of the Kingdom of God is not given to just anyone! Therefore, things ring as parables in the ears of “the blind.”

MARK 4:11-12 

11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: 

12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

Light illuminates. But light blinds others!

JOHN 9:39 

And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.

Glaring light to an unbelieving person may cause blindness. But to a believer, light illuminates the eyes to see and the mind to understand.

THE ACTS 26:18 

To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

When Stephen Shott was asked if Christ instituted infant baptism, his answer was Yes, He did, and more. There was no discrimination. It was free for all. Christ instituted baptism for infant, child, teen, adult. Age was no barrier according to this priest.

How can a child be the same as an adult, to say the least that “infant baptism” is the same with “adult baptism”? How stupid! More than not discriminating with age, his understanding also of baptism is that all nations are to be baptized.

I pity this priest and those who will believe in him! In his futile defense of his erroneous faith, he resorts to adding his own thoughts in the Bible! This is the spirit that dictated the leaders of the Roman Catholic Church to institute what they call “holy inquisition.”

They killed and annihilated everyone who would not accept their baptism and their teachings because they have in mind the wrong interpretation of what the Lord Jesus Christ said and changed it to “baptize all nations”!

During the height of the power of the Roman Catholic Church, if people did not accept baptism, they were poisoned, beheaded, burned at stake, and fed to beasts!

What was the Inquisition?

For several centuries Catholic Church lorded it over in Inquisitions. When was this?

But here’s an excerpt from a Catholic Apologist, Thomas Madden in CatholicityDotCom (October 3, 2003) trying his best to cosmeticize the Inquisition that was part of Catholic history. In “The Truth About the Inquisition,” he wrote that Conversos were admittedly those forced into baptism. (Take note of the streaks of idolatry that were introduced to them as in calling Mary, the mother of God).

Spanish rabbis after 1391 had considered conversos to be Jews, since they had been forced into baptism. Yet by 1414, rabbis repeatedly stressed that conversos were indeed true Christians, since they had voluntarily left Judaism. By the mid-15th century, a whole new converso culture was flowering in Spain – Jewish in ethnicity and culture, but Catholic in religion.

Conversos, whether new converts themselves or the descendants of converts, took enormous pride in that culture. Some even asserted that they were better than the "Old Christians," since as Jews they were related by blood to Christ Himself. When the converso bishop of Burgos, Alonso de Cartagena, prayed the Hail Mary, he would say with pride, "Holy Mary, Mother of God and my blood relative, pray for us sinners…"

Several hundred years later, a pope would be asking for forgiveness for what happened during the Inquisition. This is from The Foreign Post, March 16-22, 2000 Vol. 8 No.370 and is titled, “Please Forgive Us.”

Luckily, in the Philippines, those who did not accept the baptism in Limasawa fought with swords and killed the Roman Catholic colonizer, Ferdinand Magellan.

The death of our National Hero, Dr. Jose Rizal, was initiated by Catholics because of the attacks and criticisms written by our hero against the abuses of the Catholic Church in my country of origin, through his books, “Noli Me Tangere” and “El Filibusterismo.”

One of Rizal’s famous quotes goes –

“Our liberty will not be secured at the sword's point... We must secure it by making ourselves worthy of it. And when the people reaches that height, God will provide a weapon, the idols will be shattered, tyranny will crumble like a house of cards, and liberty will shine out like the first dawn.”

The death of Rizal is obviously religious persecution from abusive and greedy Catholic friars. Their mission: “to baptize the entire Philippine nation” because of their wrong interpretation of Matthew 28:19-20! To assure their power, even a child must be baptized contrary to biblical Christianity. 

Definitely, there’s no more inquisition these days but the Catholic Church’s forcible baptism has changed configuration: It is focusing on the innocent and helpless – the infants.

There is wisdom in God’s words. Baptism requires understanding and acceptance of the teachings of our Lord, Jesus Christ. Therefore, age is important – and more than that is the acceptance of baptism itself. Then and only then will a person be baptized. Baptism, in any case, should not be forced on anyone. Neither should any religion be.

A whole nation is not expected to accept truth and one cannot force it by any means, least of all through inquisitions like those of the past. Otherwise, through enforcing, you violate the will of the person and resort to violence or to killing him – physically as well as spiritually. This veritably is not God’s way.

More to come. May God bless you.

Read More

Infant Baptism: Why Persist When There’s No Limbo?

The concept of infant baptism to the Roman Catholic Church is a series of false doctrines knotted to form a whole which is that of going to heaven or not. It is tied to a place of no suffering after death called Limbo, “original sin,” and sprinkling of water on body parts especially the forehead – all contrary to what the Bible says. In the end as always, there is money paid. But there is no more Limbo as one brave Pope Benedict XVI pronounced. So why carry on with infant baptism? 

The reason why Catholics institute infant baptism is the belief that an unbaptized child will go to limbo. Limbo is supposedly a place where there is no suffering. 

And the reason why a child cannot go to heaven if not baptized is because of the doctrine of the “original sin.” 

And because it may be too risky for an infant to be baptized by immersion, the practice of pouring or sprinkling water in baptism was invented. 

Imagine, for convenience they are willing to disobey the sacred manner exemplified by Christ in His baptism.

MATTHEW 3:16 

And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

If we meticulously study the history or the doctrines of the RCC, its precepts and practices, we will be traveling in time as far as the Middle Ages and discover that these invented doctrines and practices were instituted a thousand years after the death of the last apostle.This clearly defines for us through history that these are man-made doctrines! 

One invention was necessitated by another and so on and so forth. The pack of lies support each other. Thus, the Bible says:

TITUS 1:14 

Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

If we may notice, the Jews are the authorities for salvation.

JOHN 4:22 

Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

But the apostles, who were taught directly by Christ, set a limit on what a Christian must believe in and be part of his faith. That limit is that Christians must learn from the Apostles not beyond what was written. Repeat: Not beyond what was written.

I CORINTHIANS 4:6 

And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

Logically and biblically, before the end of the first century, all Christian doctrines were completely taught and adhered to and practiced by early Christians. Although, the circumcision of a male child is a covenant between God and Abraham, the Apostles did not make it a necessary burden for salvation. They emphasized only four important doctrines as dictated by the Holy Spirit, excluding circumcision. These are abstaining from: 1) Pollutions of idols; 2) Fornication; 3) Things strangled; and 4) Blood.

THE ACTS 15:1-2, 19-20, 28-29 

1 And certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. 

2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. 

19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 

28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 

29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well, Fare ye well.

Emphatically, the Apostles with the instruction of Christ and the guidance of the Holy Spirit, practically and factually, omitted Old Testament practices of the Jews. This was to make Christians believe and practice only the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and not those under the Law of Moses.

THE ACTS 13:39 

And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

If even the teachings and the Law of Moses which came from God were nullified by the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles, how can we accept precepts, teachings, doctrines, invented by the Catholic Church that are “non-Jew?” Consider that Jews were authorities of faith and salvation but Jewish fables were commanded by the Apostles to be rejected by Christians!

TITUS 1:14 

Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

Let us focus on the inventions of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). Let us analyze scientifically, mathematically, and biblically their doctrine of the “original or inherited sin.” We begin with the three definitions of sin in the Bible: 

First, transgression of the law.

I JOHN 3:4 

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Second, any act not done in faith.

THE ROMANS 14:23 

And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Third, the knowledge of doing what is not good and the intentional inaction of what is good.

JAMES 4:17 

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

None of these definitions of sin apply to a child, especially to a newborn baby.

HEBREWS 5:13 

For every one that useth milk is unskillfull in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.

The human society (Of course, not all are Catholics) believe that there is a universal consideration of age in evaluating what a human does or what is done to him. There is then universal human common sense when it comes to age! Veritably, Catholic priests do not have this common sense! 

Isn’t this what their doctrine of infant baptism over the years manifest? Despite the fact that Pope Benedict XVI, speaking ex cathedra, said there is no Limbo after all, they continue with their senseless baptisms. Here’s the meaning of ex cathedra from Oxford Dictionary -

Meanwhile, let us read these exchanges from Twitter where a Catholic priest grossly displays his ignorance about Baptism. Steve Shott believes that when Christ said, Go and baptize all nations, he did not refer to any age.This indicates the shallow understanding of Catholic authorities on the meaning and essence of baptism. 

A child is devoid of understanding if he is still a child. At that age he has no capacity for making any covenant with anyone, least of all God.He cannot understand yet what it is that baptism binds him to do. But Shott mentions Matthew 28:19. -

Matthew 28:19 (KJV) 

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 

Steve Shott was being asked if Christ ordered child baptism. Was he answering the question correctly? 

Being a child can be a “disadvantage”as when one is not allowed something like baptism (in the true church). But there are times it is an advantage as for example in what is referred to as infancy defense in crimes. His age protects him from being liable for crime on the notion that the minor mind is not capable of forming criminal intent.

Infancy is a criminal defense, descended from British common law, that attempts to disprove liability for a crime by reason of the defendant's very young age. Under the assumption that minors are incapable of forming criminal intent in the same manner as adults, the common law infancy defense traditionally bars the prosecution of children under the age of seven for crimes and presumptively precludes the prosecution of children aged seven to fourteen years under the adult criminal law system. Contemporary statutes in United States criminal law, however, hold that children in the latter age group are eligible for prosecution through the juvenile justice system. (Ref: http://www.lectlaw.com/mjl/cl032.htm)

The original sin, also called ancestral sin, has Catholic origins. History records that “the concept of original sin was first alluded to in the 2nd century by Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons. At that time this Catholic Bishop was dueling with certain dualist Gnostics. (Ref: “Original Sin,” Wikipedia) Biblically speaking, the original sin of the original man was turning away his ears from listening to God to listening to his wife.

GENESIS 3:17 

And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

How can a baby have such “original sin”? The truth is, “SIN IS NOT INHERITED.” What sin our ancestors have done is not passed on to us. There is no such thing as original sin. The Bible assures us that the iniquity of the father shall not be borne by the son. God is just. As a baby, he has no sin at the time he is being baptized. Even if he sins, as he grows older like an unmarried like a Catholic priest, he won’t be able to pass anything down!!!

EZEKIEL 18:20 

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

How pitiful to think that Catholics, who possess many good things of this earth, would let their offspring inherit their sins! Is that a good thing to do – ever?

PROVERBS 19:14 

House and riches are the inheritance of fathers: and a prudent wife is from the LORD.

Adam, the original man, who committed “the original sin,” did not pass it to Abel.

HEBREWS 11:4 

By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

Abel was not baptized and so were Moses, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Baptism was instituted only by the Father at the time of John and the Lord Jesus Christ.

JOHN 1:31-32 

31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. 

32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

Although the Israelites were allegorically baptized with Moses in water and the clouds, baptism was not instituted until the coming of John.

I CORINTHIANS 10:1-2 

1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

If the doctrine of the Catholic Church that claims universal supremacy were universally applied, all infants and children since time immemorial that died without baptism would all be going to limbo! Imagine that! But Christ speaking of universal facts and spiritual truth opened the gates of heaven to all children of all dispensation!

MATTHEW 19:14 

But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

MATTHEW 18:3

And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Of the more than 260 popes in the Roman Catholic Church, I consider only one having the guts to think and that is Pope Benedict XVI. He declared that limbo is non-existent and that infants and children will go to heaven without being baptized! Could this be the reason he later resigned or was forced to resign? Was he seeing through the errors of the Roman Catholic Church? If the doctrine of infallibility “ex-cathedra” is true, can it be that only Benedict XVI was speaking the truth about infant baptism and limbo, and all the more than 260 were wrong? For almost a thousand years they taught Catholics of the existence of limbo and original sin that may bar a child from entering heaven. 

I do not expect a logical and reasonable answer from Catholic priests. None of them can answer this because none of them can speak “ex-cathedra” – unlike the pope. I, therefore, expect an answer from a pope. 

The Bible is a complete reference for the doctrine of salvation.

II TIMOTHY 3:15-17 
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

In Christ, not even a letter of the alphabet is lost.

REVELATION 22:13 
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

When He said, “I am Alpha and Omega, he is also beta, gamma, delta, epsilon….” The fullness of things and salvation is in Christ for the Father is pleased that all fullness dwell in Him.

COLOSSIANS 1:19 
For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell;

The book of Acts is a record of all Christian acts and faith - COMPLETE!

LUKE 1:1-3 
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, 
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; 
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

THE ACTS 1:1-2 
1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, 
2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

And it is evident that there was no infant baptism that was recorded in the Book of Acts. The foolish Catholic priest asked, “Where can you show me that the apostles forbade infant baptism?” 

Such a foolish question! But I am giving a logical and a biblical answer. 

The disciples, who have the right to baptize, baptized only a believing person, not an infant!

THE ACTS 8:36-38 
36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 
38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

We will continue these discussions. I have to park here. Expect more on baptism by sprinkling or pouring, and a broader depth discussion on original sin and other collateral matters. 

The reasoning of Shott - really a "bad Shott" - is that that there is no age mentioned in Matthew 28:19. That is not how to construe the Bible and its meaning. The verses are not islands by themselves. Did he read the next verse following it? We will prove biblically then beyond any shadow of doubt that there is a consideration of age in Matthew 28:19-20. 

More to come, God willing.

Read More