if exorcisms are real, then why isn't the christian religion "real"???

Originally posted by they see ALL


what are you???

I wish I knew ...

The best way I can put it is ...I am someone who believes in the integrity of the 10 commandements, but I have plenty of Doubts about Jesus.

AS for the question about Baptism (from someone else )...Man ..the Bible says Baptism is FOR Belivers ONLY !...so whats the confusion about ?? A baby dont even know his/her name is...how can he Believe in anything ?

Baptism is a cerimony, an outside sign to symbolize rebirth into the Faith...a new self is born because you repent of sins and commict to a new life. In fact, in MY opinion the baptism is both a sign of "washing away" as well if you were just born. Babies are wet they are born. (but this part is just my OP)

Baptism for babies is Catholic Dogma (and im not trwoing any stones, just stating a fact), not Biblical... and that thing that the babies are born with "original sin"...good grief...Why would God mark a baby with an unexhisting sin, when according to Christiniaty, sex and procriation between married people IS NOT A SIN.

Originally posted by BaastetNoirAS for the question about Baptism (from someone else )...Man ..the Bible says Baptism is FOR Belivers ONLY !...so whats the confusion about ?? A baby dont even know his/her name is...how can he Believe in anything ?

So you limit the power of the Holy Spirit huh?

Even though the title of this article is In Defense of Infant Baptism, the truth of the matter is that those who reject the Baptism of infants are the ones who should be in the position of defending their stance. While infant Baptism is rooted in the history of the early Christian Church, the so-called "Believer’s Baptism" originates in the post-Reformation Anabaptist movement of the sixteenth century. But be that as it may, the fact still remains that any theological position has to find its basis in Scripture. So, what does the Bible say about the Baptism of infants?

Yet, the Bible is not silent in the matter. What you see in the Word of God concerning the Baptism of infants depends upon how you approach the Word. When searching Scripture in order to answer the infant Baptism question, the issue is not whether or not there are any specific references including children and infants in Baptism. Rather, the issue is whether or not there are specific references in Scripture excluding children and infants from Baptism. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is an inclusive message. "God so loved the world," and Jesus commanded us to "baptize all nations." Obviously, infants are a part of the world and represented in all nations.

In Mark 10: 14 our Lord Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." The Greek word for children in this text is paidia, which means babes in arms. What means other than Baptism has God provided whereby little children can be brought to Jesus? Baptism is the only way we know of. If you want to obey the command of the Lord Jesus concerning your little children, have them baptized!

In addition, there are five references in the New Testament to the Baptism of entire households. Peter baptized the household of Cornelius (Acts 11: 14). In Philippi, Paul baptized the household of Lydia and the household of the jailer (Acts 16: 15, 33). He also baptized the household of Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue in Corinth. In his first epistle to the Corinthians, he speaks of baptizing the household of Stephanas (1: 16). The Greek word for household is oikon and refers to all the inhabitants of the house including slaves, servants, infants and children. Can anyone seriously suggest that within the households of Cornelius, Lydia, the Jailer, Crispus and Stephanas there were no children or infants present?

In addition, if the members of these households had converted to Judaism, all the males would have been circumcised. This included infants who were at least eight days old. In Colossians 2: 9-12, the Apostle Paul compares the effect of circumcision with the effect of Baptism.

While there are no specific references to infant Baptism in the New Testament, there is every reason to believe that children and infants were included. As you will see when you read Pastor Kastens’ article Infant Baptism in Early Church History, the witness of the early church fathers is very clear. Children and infants were included in Baptism.

Paul writes in Ephesians 2: 8-9 that we are saved by grace through faith, and it is not of our doing. Grace comes before faith. Baptism is a pure administration of the grace of God in Christ Jesus.

In Defense of Infant Baptism


I have asked myself this many times, and I can tell you a story of someone I knew that was baptized as an infant but joined an 'age of knowing' Church. They kept telling him to get baptized as if his original one was moot. Every Sunday the pastor would ask if anyone needs to make a statement of faith and to come forward for baptism. This person prayed the night before on guidance, that next Sunday morning, the pastor never asked. He had his answer..

Originally posted by edsinger

So you limit the power of the Holy Spirit huh?

I dont limit anything, The Bible does...You should add or take away from it right ?

Baptising infants IS ADDING to the bible...there was no Baptism for children PERIOD! Dont complain to me ...complain to gOD...He made the rules..Baptism for believers only. I was baptised as a baby at a Catholic church, and I give it absoultely no credit.

Besides this thread is about EXORCISM... not Baptism...

P.S - If I had to follow anything it would be the words of Jesus, He was the Son of God, and according to many "God in the Flesh"... Jesus "God in the flesh" said baptism for believers ONLY... are you putting the words of Paul a meer man ahead of the words of "God in the Flesh " ???

Paul was a falibale man, he made many mistakes and contradicted Jesus words many times.

Originally posted by BaastetNoir

Originally posted by edsinger

So you limit the power of the Holy Spirit huh?

I dont limit anything, The Bible does...You should add or take away from it right ?

Baptising infants IS ADDING to the bible...there was no Baptism for children PERIOD! Dont complain to me ...complain to gOD...He made the rules..Baptism for believers only. I was baptised as a baby at a Catholic church, and I give it absoultely no credit.

Gee is that what He said?

Mat 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

That would seem to me to be what He said



Acts 2:36 "Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
Acts 2:37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?"
Acts 2:38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Talk about WIERD!

Tonights sermon was on this VERY subject.

Lets take a look,

NIV
Mark 10:13 People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them.
Mark 10:14 When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
Mark 10:15 I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."
Mark 10:16 And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

IN very few instances does Jesus get angry, but this is one. The disiciples are saying something to the effect, "Jesus is a busy man, he doesnt have time for children" and then note the STRONG words. He actually says 'indignant'


indignant adj.
1. The actress was indignant at the columnist's personal questions: incensed, offended, angry, mad, infuriated, displeased, piqued, peeved,
resentful, irate, provoked, riled, wrathful, fuming; Informal miffed,
huffy, put off, put out, worked up, sore, on one's high horse, steaming,
wrought up.

antonyms: pleased, delighted.



Thats pretty strong! Some other versions concur with this,

YLT
Mark 10:14 and Jesus having seen, was much displeased, and he said to them, 'Suffer the children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the reign of God;

KJV
Mark 10:14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

Strongs HG
Mark 10:14 . . iesous:G2424 eido:G1492 . . . aganakteo:G23 aganakteo:G23 . epo:G2036 . . aphiemi:G863 . paidion:G3813 paidion:G3813 . erchomai:G2064 . . . koluo:G2967 . . . . toioutos:G5108 . . basileia:G932 . theos:G2316


G23. aganakteo, ag-an-ak-teh'-o; from agan (much) and achthos (grief; akin to the base of G43); to be greatly afflicted, i.e. (fig.) indignant:--be much (sore) displeased, have (be moved with, with) indignation.

Christ says in this verse that you are not to HINDER them at all, that the approach of a child is how it needs to be done. It goes back to that faith thing again, its innocence and trust. That even young children CAN believe. Its right there!

I consider Catholicism to be a false religion and not Christianity.

That being said, when a Catholic priest exorcises someone, the demon leaves--it's part of a game. That makes the person think, hey, he drove the demon out, he must be a man of God.

Has anyone ever considered that?

Some types of demons only go out by prayer and fasting.

As far as religion--religion won't save you. Only Jesus can.

Originally posted by Amethyst
I consider Catholicism to be a false religion and not Christianity.

As far as religion--religion won't save you. Only Jesus can.

Ouch, I respectfully disagree about Catholics. They do call upon Jesus as their Savior and therefore are saved in my opinion. If you want to get to one that I question its Mormonism, but they too believe in Jesus.

You and I do not know the answers to this, therefore its only speculation on our part.

Originally posted by they see ALL
i heard that exorcisms were real and recognized by the catholic church...

are exorcisms recognized by science???

if they are, then why isn't the catholic religion (a religion that teaches about exorcisms) "true"???

i mean, if an aspect of a religion (in this case, exorcisms) is recognized by science, why doesn't the entire world believe???

i know it is about faith, but science is science...

can i have any real answers that do not deal with faith???

thanks...

First off, the belief in possession and exorcism is not a Christian-exclusive belief. It existed LONG before Christianity was anything more than an idea, in MANY different cultures - damn near all of them, in fact.

Even if possession recognized by Science, that in no way makes Catholicism or any other belief any more true or valid than any other - primarily because damn near every belief system shares a belief in possession.

I'm sorry for disrupting the post about the Exorcisms etc....

Just needed to put this point across about the inherited SIN issue.
Bastetnoir/

babies are born with "original sin"...good grief...Why would God mark a baby with an unexhisting sin, when according to Christiniaty, sex and procriation between married people IS NOT A SIN.

I agree with you.

Just needed to say that......ORIGINAL SIN of Adam and eve is NOT INHERITED by us...it is their sin.

The SIN of Adam and Eve was that they DID NOT KEEP THE ONE COMMANDEMENT OF GOD) ...and breaking that ONE COMMANDEMENT caused the CHANGE in NATURE....it brought DEATH(there was no DEATH before the FALL ......This DEATH is inherited by all PEOPLE...we cannot escape DEATH.
Water from the beginning is very significant in CLEANSING....

"For behold, I was conceived in iniquities, and in sins did my mother bear me" (Psalm 50:7).
The Apostle Paul expresses this thought still more clearly: "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world,
and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Romans 5:12).

Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy ~VII. Original Sin

IX
helen

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
Baptism for babies is Catholic Dogma (and im not trwoing any stones, just stating a fact), not Biblical... and that thing that the babies are born with "original sin"...good grief...Why would God mark a baby with an unexhisting sin, when according to Christiniaty, sex and procriation between married people IS NOT A SIN.

i was under the impression that when two parents have sex, and child is born, this child has one sin on its soul, original sin, from adam and eve...

Jesus did not have original sin (i think mary didn't either) because He was born of a virgin (no sex)...

and baptism is meant to clear away this sin...

this is just what i was told in a catholic middle school, i could be wrong...

Originally posted by edsinger
Talk about WIERD!

Tonights sermon was on this VERY subject.

Lets take a look,

NIV
Mark 10:13 People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them.
Mark 10:14 When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
Mark 10:15 I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."
Mark 10:16 And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.



IN very few instances does Jesus get angry, but this is one. The disiciples are saying something to the effect, "Jesus is a busy man, he doesnt have time for children" and then note the STRONG words. He actually says 'indignant'

ah yes, but lets go a coupla' verses later:
st.mark 10:

17 " And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?

18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. "

and though Jesus did bless the children, he did not baptize them.

Thats pretty strong! Some other versions concur with this,

YLT
Mark 10:14
KJV
Mark 10:14
Strongs HG
Mark 10:14 . . iesous:G2424 eido:G1492 . . . aganakteo:G23 aganakteo:G23 . epo:G2036 . . aphiemi:G863 . paidion:G3813 paidion:G3813 . erchomai:G2064 . . . koluo:G2967 . . . . toioutos:G5108 . . basileia:G932 . theos:G2316


G23. aganakteo, ag-an-ak-teh'-o; from agan (much) and achthos (grief; akin to the base of G43); to be greatly afflicted, i.e. (fig.) indignant:--be much (sore) displeased, have (be moved with, with) indignation.

and quoting different versions of the same christian bible, and different books in the same bible that say the same things don't count from now on.

Christ says in this verse that you are not to HINDER them at all, that the approach of a child is how it needs to be done. It goes back to that faith thing again, its innocence and trust. That even young children CAN believe. Its right there!

I could take a child and make them beleive in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, the Easter Bunny, that I can cut my thumb off and reattache it and that I'm rich...

but that's not how I THINK HE MEANT IT like it makes a difference. I think he was talking about how they dont to know how bills feel, so they don't covet gold and two coats, and how they can love even though we yell, spank or punish them... turn the other cheek... love the mean kid ... not believe that if you don't give Jesus a Hug You aRE daMnEd To BURN IN HELLLLL!!!!!!

Jesus didn't do the Kids like that did He?

but that's JMO.



[edit on 7-9-2005 by passengername]

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
The best way I can put it is ...I am someone who believes in the integrity of the 10 commandements, but I have plenty of Doubts about Jesus.

Do you really believe in all ten, and which 10 (there are two conflicting sets within the Bible)?

Personally, I see value in ~5 of them (theft, murder, false witness, adultery, coveting is not generally good either) but the others are worth less than 0.

Originally posted by Amethyst
That being said, when a Catholic priest exorcises someone, the demon leaves--it's part of a game. That makes the person think, hey, he drove the demon out, he must be a man of God.

Has anyone ever considered that?

Some types of demons only go out by prayer and fasting.

I would say that any verifiable posession is proof of the supernatural, though not proof of any particular brand.

reply to post by slymattb


My question is this, if epilepsy is cured by medicine, then it isn't a demon as Jesus calls it in the scriptures. How do christians reconcile this?

You people have no idea what Original sin is....inherited from Adam and eve....GIMMIE a break!

Stop listening to what your church preaches and read the bible for what its worth...theres one man that spoke anything worth while learning...its pretty obvious who. Other then that the rest of the bible is garbage. If you can't figure that out you're lost to your religion. They control what you believe and thus you are a slave to them.

Enjoy...

Now when it comes to exorcisim, i don't know if these people are "possessed" by a demon or just overly spoiled as a child. I've seen a few children "exorcised" so to speak... Yet somehow i think that instead of spiting out bible verse, a sharp slap across the face would probably snap them out of it.

As for the truth behind demon possession, i don't know....so i won't judge.