Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

1.0K

I'm being sincere. I promise. How do you guys justify the following:

  • original sin and baptism of infants
  • transubstantiation
  • celibacy among clergy
  • saints (idol worship imo)
  • systemic/widespread issue of pedophilia among clergy
  • woke Pope

EDIT: Full transparency - I have refered to the catholic church as the church of the devil in other subs. Just my opinion.

I'm being sincere. I promise. How do you guys justify the following: - original sin and baptism of infants - transubstantiation - celibacy among clergy - saints (idol worship imo) - systemic/widespread issue of pedophilia among clergy - woke Pope EDIT: Full transparency - I have refered to the catholic church as the church of the devil in other subs. Just my opinion.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (23).
[–] • 0 pt (edited )

I'm a believer man. I beleive in the godhead, baptism, the divinity of christ. And I try to follow christ's gospel. The catholic church just doesn't teach Christ's gospel. They teach some bastardized version of it.

And the mary magdalene thing is a fan theory, I grant you that, but the facts are that the bible never states that christ was celibate. So, you cant assume that he was. And he never taught celibacy.

And circumcision is not baptism man. I don't get you're argument there.

[–] • 0 pt

So, most people's objections to infant baptism is that the child is too young to decide. Circumcision is an outward sign of the Abrahamic covenant, and defined someone as a Jew. My point is that since Jesus was circumcised as an infant, baptizing an infant cannot be wrong.

Jesus Christ was celibate as He was never married. The bible specifically states adultery (sex with a person that is not your spouse) is wrong. The bible specifically states fornication is wrong. There is no evidence in any legitimate historical text that shows Jesus was married, and my thoughts are that if he did get married, that most certainly would be listed in the bible.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

Baptism is a saving ordinance. It's for the remission of sins (mark 1:4), it symbolically washes sins away (acts 22:16). Also, repentance is a precursor for baptism (acts 2:38). Infants are born perfect. They have nothing to repent for. And they wouldn't be able to repent anyway because they're babys. They don't need to be saved. They don't need baptism.

What would fornication and adultury have to do with christ being married? You're grasping at straws. You can't just assume jesus wasn't married. The bible omits jesus' childhood. Why couldn't it omit the fact that he was married also? We only know that peter was married because of a one passing verse that mentions his mother in law.