Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,132
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 870:
Line 870: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
This statement is clear. They were to repent of their unbelief. They were to be baptized in the Name given by the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins. And when they did this, they would receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. These statements of the Chief Apostle, given the Keys to open the Kingdom of God to unbelievers, by, among other things, declaring its mysteries (Mat 16:19), show to us that Baptism truly regenerates the soul. It has efficacy, as the same St. Peter the Apostle would later write, "by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet 3:21). That means Baptism effects something. It is not just a bare and empty sign. It effects the resurrection of the believer from sin and death to grace and life." https://www.conservapedia.com/Debate:_Does_Baptism_regenerate_or_is_it_symbolic%3F#Acts_2:38_-_St._Peter_declares_that_the_Spirit_is_promised_to_the_Baptized.21 [[User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier]]<sup>[[User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King]]</sup> 18:39, 15 July 2020 (EDT)
This statement is clear. They were to repent of their unbelief. They were to be baptized in the Name given by the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins. And when they did this, they would receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. These statements of the Chief Apostle, given the Keys to open the Kingdom of God to unbelievers, by, among other things, declaring its mysteries (Mat 16:19), show to us that Baptism truly regenerates the soul. It has efficacy, as the same St. Peter the Apostle would later write, "by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet 3:21). That means Baptism effects something. It is not just a bare and empty sign. It effects the resurrection of the believer from sin and death to grace and life." https://www.conservapedia.com/Debate:_Does_Baptism_regenerate_or_is_it_symbolic%3F#Acts_2:38_-_St._Peter_declares_that_the_Spirit_is_promised_to_the_Baptized.21 [[User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier]]<sup>[[User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King]]</sup> 18:39, 15 July 2020 (EDT)
:Roman Catholics are doctrinally mistaken that a religious ceremony performed on them as an infant makes them children of God just as the Pharisees were doctrinally mistaken that circumcision made them children of Abraham. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 19:32, 16 July 2020 (EDT)
:Roman Catholics are doctrinally mistaken that a religious ceremony performed on them as an infant makes them children of God just as the Pharisees were doctrinally mistaken that circumcision made them children of Abraham. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 19:32, 16 July 2020 (EDT)
== Catholic vs. Protestant debates: I posted this material on User: NishantXavier and User: RobSmith's talk pages ==
Please read this material I posted on User: NishantXavier and User: RobSmith's talk pages.
=== Please stop having debates on talk pages. Conservapedia has debate pages ===
Conservapedia has debate pages. For example, here is a debate page: [[Debate:Are alcohol, marijuana, and nicotine gateway drugs?]].
What I see now is a whole bunch of repetitive and poorly organized material on talk pages dealing with Catholic vs. Protestant issues that is not bringing web traffic. This needs to stop. I stopped reading this repetive material and I am others have as well.
If you are going to have debates, for the sake of Conservapedia readers, have them on debate pages. Nobody wants to read poorly organized and repetitive material.
So please stop having debates on talk pages. Conservapedia has debate pages.
Thank you.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:14, 18 July 2020 (EDT)
=== Addendum: Re: Catholic vs. Protestant debates on talk pages ===
I posted the below message to RobSmith and it refines my thinking on this matter.
RobSmith, I know you do your best to bring in web traffic which Conservapedians appreciate.
I have a small request.
Conservapedia has debate pages. For example, here is a debate page: [[Debate:Are alcohol, marijuana, and nicotine gateway drugs?]].
Having a debate on a specific issue, would make the debate exchanges more organized and debates with debate titles on the page would be more organized.
I would also suggest setting up debate guidelines. Because right now the back and forth between the Protestants and Catholics is getting repetitive. And because it is on talk pages, it tends not to be very organized.
What I see now is a whole bunch of repetitive and poorly organized material on talk pages dealing with Catholic vs. Protestant issues that is not bringing web traffic.
If you are going to have debates, for the sake of Conservapedia readers, have them on debate pages. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:23, 18 July 2020 (EDT)