[De Maria]

Everyone that agrees that we are born in sin and require baptism to make us better in the eyes of the Almighty so that we don't burn in hell.

Could you give a specific quote and a specific name?

[EIFS EXPERT]

Exodus 20:4-7
4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments.

There are others but naming all of them is silly. My point is that the religion is archaic and depicts God as a mean unforgiving dictator.

[Tj3]

It is very telling that Jesus was baptizing in the Ennon near Salim when He said this:

John 3:23 And John also was baptizing in Ennon near Salim; because there was much water there; and they came and were baptized.

Did you notice that was AFTER John 3:5? Again, John 3:5 was not in the context of baptism.

John 3:22-23
22 After these things Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there He remained with them and baptized.
NKJV

Note however, that Jesus does not equate the flesh and the water. This is a connection which you have made because you want to justify this belief.

Read the passage again.

John 3:5-7
5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
NKJV

Many places but especially in these words we are reviewing. Here is another:

Mark 16 16 He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved:...

This was previously refuted - again it is wrong to cut a verse in half and take one half out of context.

1 Peter 3 21 Whereunto baptism being of the like form, now saveth you also:...

Another one taken out of context. Let's look at the passage in context

1 Peter 3:18-22
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to
God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went
and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the
Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which
a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into
heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been
made subject to Him.
NKJV

We see three things discussed here:

1) Noah's Ark and its role in saving people through the flood
2) Water baptism
3) The gospel and the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

This passage relates these three items by showing how they relate. First Peter speaks the death of Christ on the cross, setting the focus for the passage. As a result of this passage, we know that the focus of the verses that follow are regarding the death of Christ on the cross for our sins. This death for our sins is then compared, to the flood, with the flood discussed as a symbolic “type” or comparison to salvation which come through the cross of Christ. Then we are told that there is an anti-type, baptism. I often hear the argument that an “anti-type” is the opposite of a type, or as one person recently said, an anti-type being the opposite of a type is “reality”. Unfortunately that argument is not “reality” because in Greek and similar languages, “anti-” often does not mean “opposite” as we understand it in English, but rather means a replacement or a contrast. This when we are told about one type, and then we are told that there is an anti-type, what we see here is a contrasting type of the death on the cross.

an·ti·type n.

- One that is foreshadowed by or identified with an earlier symbol or type, such as a figure in the New Testament who has a counterpart in the Old Testament.
- An opposite or contrasting type.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin
Company. All rights reserved.


This understanding also agrees with what Paul said in Romans 6 where he identifies baptism as a “likeness” or symbolic of the death and resurrection on the cross:

Rom 6:3-7
3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized
into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just
as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk
in newness of life. 5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death,
certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old
man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should
no longer be slaves of sin.
NKJV

In discussions with proponents of baptismal regeneration, they will often just read out Romans 6:3 and then stop before you get to the verse which describes baptism as a “likeness” of the death and resurrection of Christ. So we find that Romans 6 and 1 Peter 3 are telling us the same thing – baptism is symbolic.

Now with that in mind, let's look at the verse which is most often quoted by proponents of
baptismal regeneration:

1 Peter 3:21
21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh,
NKJV

The contrasting types, the ark, which saved Noah and family through the water, and baptism which saves us in the water - as a type. A "type" simply means symbolic, and thus is symbolic of the death and resurrection of Christ through we we are in fact saved.

Now, let's look at the wider context:

1 Peter 3:18
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us toGod, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,
NKJV

Salvation came by Christ suffering on the cross for our sins and then we are made alive by the Spirit. Scripture says that there is one baptism, and it is not a baptism that replaces the blood with water, or replaces the spirit with water, but it is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Note that by stating that it is water baptism that is essential, what we are in effect being told is that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is not essential, and that they choose water to replace the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Consider the implications.

1 Peter 3:21
21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.
NKJV

Note that it is water that removes the filth of the flesh, but the water is symbolic of the salvation on the cross. Also note that the substances which cleanses, is the answer of a good conscience towards God. We see a similar reference in Hebrews 9

This passage is very clear regarding the symbolic nature of the various rituals. The reference here to ritual washings is the same word used elsewhere in the New Testament where it is translated as “baptism”.

Heb 9:11-15
11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more
perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. 12 Not with the blood
of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all,
having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of
a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, 1 4 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 And for this
reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
NKJV

We see confirmation here that it is not the water that cleanses, but the blood of Christ sacrificed on the cross.

Romans 6 4 For we are buried together with him by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life.

I dealt with this one in the same rebuttal above.

John 14 23 Jesus answered, and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him.

Are you trying to say that unless obedient to baptism, we cannot be saved?

[Tj3]

As I understand, it is the result of Baptism. So if it isn't simultaneous, it is immediately after.

1227 According to the Apostle Paul, the believer enters through Baptism into communion with Christ's death, is buried with him, and rises with him:

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

The baptized have "put on Christ." Through the Holy Spirit, Baptism is a bath that purifies, justifies, and sanctifies.

Sincerely,

Perhaps you would answer the question that I asked earlier.

Acts 10:47-48
47 Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
NKJV

How were these people saved and filled with the Holy Spirit before being baptized?

[De Maria]

Perhaps you would answer the question that I asked earlier.

Acts 10:47-48
47 Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
NKJV

How were these people saved and filled with the Holy Spirit before being baptized?

Where does it say that they were saved before they received Baptism?

[De Maria]

There are others but naming all of them is silly.

Why? The only way to respond to anything is if the complaint is specific. Otherwise we are just talking past each other.

My point is that the religion is archaic and depicts God as a mean unforgiving dictator.

Which religion is archaic?

As for Catholicism. It depicts God as a loving yet strict Father.

Exodus 20:4-7
4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments.


This verse acknowledges that fathers teach their children to sin against God. And if the children do not convert from their father's teaching, God will punish them. But f they convert, they will break the curse.

punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

This does not say what you originally alleged, that innocent children were called sinners.

Sincerely,

[EIFS EXPERT]

Do unborn babies that die in traffic accidents go to hell?

[Fr_Chuck]

The exact fate of babies is not know, we all hope and pray because God is also a loving God. And this is why in the largest part of Christianity, babies who are born are soon baptised, and in those that do not baptise the majority of them dedicate the baby to Christ.

At least by mans logic, we can't believe that God would hold their judgement on them, since they only carry original sin, which of course Jesus also died for. And of course can not ask for his forgiveness yet.

It is when they reach an age that they can make that choice that one has to worry the most.

But then we can't change what happens to them one way or the other, what we can do, is to be sure that the parents are saved, and are beleivers, and that all we can understand that Jesus loves them enough to die for them, in their place. And they need to ask forgiveness of their sins and accept him as their savior.

This does not dimiss the original sin, since we know that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, so anyone can not be saved without Christ, but if they can not call on him thierself, I am sure he is still there for them.

[Tj3]

Where does it say that they were saved before they received Baptism?

In Acts 10:47, we are told that they received the Holy Spirit as the Apostles had - and scripture is abundantly clear that only those who are saved can receive the Holy Spirit.

[De Maria]

Did you notice that was AFTER John 3:5? Again, John 3:5 was not in the context of baptism.

Then it was immediately after. The proximity of this verse to the act of Baptizing is the context.

Read the passage again.

Why? It is clear.

JThis was previously refuted

Nope.

- again it is wrong to cut a verse in half and take one half out of context.

Another one taken out of context. Let's look at the passage in context

Nope.

1 Peter 3:18-22
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to
God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went
and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the
Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which
a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into
heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been
made subject to Him.
NKJV

We see three things discussed here:

1) Noah's Ark and its role in saving people through the flood
2) Water baptism
3) The gospel and the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

This passage relates these three items by showing how they relate. First Peter speaks the death of Christ on the cross, setting the focus for the passage. As a result of this passage, we know that the focus of the verses that follow are regarding the death of Christ on the cross for our sins. This death for our sins is then compared, to the flood, with the flood discussed as a symbolic “type” or comparison to salvation which come through the cross of Christ. Then we are told that there is an anti-type, baptism. I often hear the argument that an “anti-type” is the opposite of a type, or as one person recently said, an anti-type being the opposite of a type is “reality”. Unfortunately that argument is not “reality” because in Greek and similar languages, “anti-” often does not mean “opposite” as we understand it in English, but rather means a replacement or a contrast. This when we are told about one type, and then we are told that there is an anti-type, what we see here is a contrasting type of the death on the cross.

an·ti·type n.

- One that is foreshadowed by or identified with an earlier symbol or type, such as a figure in the New Testament who has a counterpart in the Old Testament.
- An opposite or contrasting type.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin
Company. All rights reserved.


This understanding also agrees with what Paul said in Romans 6 where he identifies baptism as a “likeness” or symbolic of the death and resurrection on the cross:

Rom 6:3-7
3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized
into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just
as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk
in newness of life. 5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death,
certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old
man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should
no longer be slaves of sin.
NKJV

In discussions with proponents of baptismal regeneration, they will often just read out Romans 6:3 and then stop before you get to the verse which describes baptism as a “likeness” of the death and resurrection of Christ. So we find that Romans 6 and 1 Peter 3 are telling us the same thing – baptism is symbolic.

Again, you are reading your own presuppositions into Scripture. It is obvious in both cases that Baptism is depicted as efficacious and necessary for salvation. Yes, the Flood is a foreshadowing of Baptism because just as Noah and humankind were saved through the waters of the flood, so are we now saved by the Waters of Baptism.

And yes, Jesus death on the Cross is like our death to sin in the waters of Baptism but that doesn't mean that Baptism is not efficacious. It confirms the efficacy of Baptism.

Now with that in mind, let's look at the verse which is most often quoted by proponents of
baptismal regeneration:

1 Peter 3:21
21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh,
NKJV

The contrasting types, the ark, which saved Noah and family through the water, and baptism which saves us in the water - as a type. A "type" simply means symbolic, and thus is symbolic of the death and resurrection of Christ through we we are in fact saved.

False. It does not mean symbolic. He doesn't say, it is as though baptism saves us, but says, baptism now saves us.

Now, let's look at the wider context:

1 Peter 3:18
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us toGod, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit,
NKJV

Salvation came by Christ suffering on the cross for our sins and then we are made alive by the Spirit. Scripture says that there is one baptism, and it is not a baptism that replaces the blood with water, or replaces the spirit with water, but it is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Note that by stating that it is water baptism that is essential, what we are in effect being told is that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is not essential, and that they choose water to replace the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Consider the implications.

1 Peter 3:21
21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.
NKJV

Note that it is water that removes the filth of the flesh, but the water is symbolic of the salvation on the cross. Also note that the substances which cleanses, is the answer of a good conscience towards God. We see a similar reference in Hebrews 9

I see your problem. You think I am denying the symbolic aspect of Baptism. No, I'm not. Baptism is an efficacious symbol. It is both/and. Not either/or.

1217 In the liturgy of the Easter Vigil, during the blessing of the baptismal water, the Church solemnly commemorates the great events in salvation history that already prefigured the mystery of Baptism:

Father, you give us grace through sacramental signs,
which tell us of the wonders of your unseen power.

In Baptism we use your gift of water,
which you have made a rich symbol
of the grace you give us in this sacrament.

This passage is very clear regarding the symbolic nature of the various rituals. The reference here to ritual washings is the same word used elsewhere in the New Testament where it is translated as “baptism”.

Please reread my messages. The water symbolizes what is actually happening.

And yes, it is Jesus death on the Cross which empowers this Sacrament:

1225 In his Passover Christ opened to all men the fountain of Baptism. He had already spoken of his Passion, which he was about to suffer in Jerusalem, as a "Baptism" with which he had to be baptized. The blood and water that flowed from the pierced side of the crucified Jesus are types of Baptism and the Eucharist, the sacraments of new life. From then on, it is possible "to be born of water and the Spirit" in order to enter the Kingdom of God.

See where you are baptized, see where Baptism comes from, if not from the cross of Christ, from his death. There is the whole mystery: he died for you. In him you are redeemed, in him you are saved.

Heb 9:11-15
11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more
perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. 12 Not with the blood
of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all,
having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of
a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, 1 4 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? 15 And for this
reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
NKJV

We see confirmation here that it is not the water that cleanses, but the blood of Christ sacrificed on the cross.

Which in no way contradicts the efficacy of Baptism.

I dealt with this one in the same rebuttal above.

And I explained how you're rebuttal is based on false assumptions.

Are you trying to say that unless obedient to baptism, we cannot be saved?

Unless obedient to Jesus Christ who requires Baptism.

Sincerely,

[Tj3]

Then it was immediately after. The proximity of this verse to the act of Baptizing is the context.

It does not matter how soon after, it was not the same event. That is the point.

Why? It is clear.

Yes it is clear, but you appear to have missed what it says about the flesh and water.

John 3:5-7
5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
NKJV

Nope.

Simply saying "nope" is not convincing when scripture says otherwise.

Nope.

ditto.

Again, you are reading your own presuppositions into Scripture. It is obvious in both cases that Baptism is depicted as efficacious and necessary for salvation. Yes, the Flood is a foreshadowing of Baptism because just as Noah and humankind were saved through the waters of the flood, so are we now saved by the Waters of Baptism.

Nowhere does scipture say that it is efficacious and necessary for salvation. Indeed if you read about why we bapgtize in scripture, and it source from the OT, you will see that it has always been symbolic, and scripture always speaks of it as symbolic.

If it was essential for salvation, then surely you could show us where, and surely you could expl;ain how people could be saved in scripture before water baptism - a point that I have raised a few times and is yet to be addressed.

And yes, Jesus death on the Cross is like our death to sin in the waters of Baptism but that doesn't mean that Baptism is not efficacious. It confirms the efficacy of Baptism.

Claiming it does not make it so. Show us the scripture!

False. It does not mean symbolic. He doesn't say, it is as though baptism saves us, but says, baptism now saves us.

This is going to be useless to discuss this with you if you deny the definitions of English words.

I see your problem. You think I am denying the symbolic aspect of Baptism. No, I'm not. Baptism is an efficacious symbol. It is both/and. Not either/or.

An "efficacious symbol" is a non-scriptural oxymoron.

1217 In the liturgy of the Easter Vigil, during the blessing of the baptismal water, the Church solemnly commemorates the great events in salvation history that already prefigured the mystery of Baptism:

Since I reject the CCC, as do most denominations, and since it is not scripture, quoting it will not move this discussion forward.

Please reread my messages. The water symbolizes what is actually happening.

And yes, it is Jesus death on the Cross which empowers this Sacrament:

1225 In his Passover Christ opened to all men the fountain of Baptism. He had already spoken of his Passion, which he was about to suffer in Jerusalem, as a "Baptism" with which he had to be baptized. The blood and water that flowed from the pierced side of the crucified Jesus are types of Baptism and the Eucharist, the sacraments of new life. From then on, it is possible "to be born of water and the Spirit" in order to enter the Kingdom of God.

I'll stick with what God's word says.

Which in no way contradicts the efficacy of Baptism.

But is does indeed because scripture ONLY says that baptism is symbolic and says in any places (and I'd be glad to quote several if you wish) that we are saved if we simply believe in Jesus as our Saviour.

And I explained how you're rebuttal is based on false assumptions.

Not yet - you repeated the same half verse again - taken out of context of the second half.

Unless obedient to Jesus Christ who requires Baptism.

I am still waiting for any verse where Jesus says baptism is required, and if obedience is required, then Rom 3:23 says that we are all without hope.

[EIFS EXPERT]

Again, the OP asked why is God a jealous God and how can he love and hate us at the same time? Condemning us all to hell if we don't get baptized and all. That is just ridiculous. I couldn't serve any dictator, heavenly or otherwise. It goes against my American spirit.

[Tj3]

Again, the OP asked why is God a jealous God and how can he love and hate us at the same time? Condemning us all to hell if we don't get baptized and all. That is just rediculous. I couldn't serve any dictator, heavenly or otherwise. It goes against my American spirit.

Forget the baptism part because that position is widely rejected within Christianity.

However, onto your main point - God did not condemn us. We condemned ourselves.

Look at it this way, if you go out speeding and cause a major accident, and the court finds you guilty - who is at fault? Is it the court for finding you guilty of something that you did, and punishing you accordingly, or you for disobeying the law in the first place? Is it unjust to disallow dangerous driving? Or is it showing concern for the majority of people and for the stability and well-being of all to have laws in place which are for the benefit of all?

Consider.

[EIFS EXPERT]

According to the bible there is but one way to enter the kingdom of heaven and that is through Jesus Christ. You know, we must believe the stories of bread to the masses and the healing of lepers as well as the walking on water. I'm sorry but that sounds unreal. I have to see it to believe it.

This country has been known to have ridiculous laws. I wouldn't exactly put all my trust in the courts because they are not perfect.

Religion is out of control. Christians are killing Muslims, Muslims are killing Jews, and the Jews are plotting everyone's destruction.

[ordinaryguy]

Why? It is clear.

Nope.

Nope.

Again, you are reading your own presuppositions into Scripture.


False.

And I explained how you're rebuttal is based on false assumptions.

Simply saying "nope" is not convincing when scripture says otherwise.

ditto.


Claiming it does not make it so. Show us the scripture!


This is going to be useless to discuss this with you if you deny the definitions of English words.


An "efficacious symbol" is a non-scriptural oxymoron.

I'll stick with what God's word says.

Not yet - you repeated the same half verse again - taken out of context of the second half.

You guys are great. I love it. I can't figure out which of you is the pot and which one is the kettle, but you're both really good at pointing out each other's blackness.

Please reread my messages. The water symbolizes what is actually happening.

As I understand, it [the Spirit of God cleansing the soul] is the result of Baptism.

It looks to me like you've executed a perfect 180. To say that one thing is the result of another means that the former caused the latter. That's different from saying that it symbolizes or represents it.

[Tj3]

According to the bible there is but one way to enter the kingdom of heaven and that is through Jesus Christ. You know, we must believe the stories of bread to the masses and the healing of lepers as well as the walking on water. I'm sorry but that sounds unreal. I have to see it to believe it.

Look around you - tell us how this all came to be, tell us how creation came to be. Tell us why we have life. It is all just too incredible to believe, but yet it is here. Do you see electricity? Do you see heat? Do you see air? No, and yet you believe that it is all true and it is there because you see the outcome of it existence. The same is true for God.

This country has been known to have ridiculous laws. I wouldn't exactly put all my trust in the courts because they are not perfect.

Imperfect laws put in by imperfect people do not in any way take away from the point that I made in my previous post.

Religion is out of control. Christians are killing Muslims, Muslims are killing Jews, and the Jews are plotting everyone's destruction.

The fact that people mis-use and manipulate people in such fashion does not take away from the truth of Christianity. Again, just because there are people who do bad things does not mean that all people are bad - that is a logic fallacy.

This thread is about Biblical Christianity. Many things are done in the name of Christ which are not consistent with His word. Let's not focus on that, but rather let's go and see what His word says. If someone went around doing bad things and said that they were doing it in your name, would that make you wrong? No, so let's not say that Christianity is wrong because of what some folk do in the name of Christ.

BTW, I object and vehemently disagree with the anti-semitism implied in your last remark.

[NeedKarma]

Look around you - tell us how this all came to be, tell us how creation came to be. Tell us why we have life. It is all just too incredible to believe, but yet it is here. Do you see electricity? Do you see heat? Do you see air?

That's exactly what the Greeks and Romans did when they did not understand something - they created gods to explain it.

[Tj3]

That's exactly what the Greeks and Romans did when they did not understand something - they created gods to explain it.

Yes, their gods are of their own creation, I agree.

[EIFS EXPERT]

Uh, yeah... well the Greeks and the Romans created religion to control their subjects.

Tj3, you ask me questions you really don't want the answers to.

[Tj3]

Uh, yeah...well the Greeks and the Romans created religion to control their subjects.

Tj3, you ask me questions you really don't want the answers to.

Yes, they did. I agree.

Which questions are you referring to?