• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Catholic clergy, HHS regulation, and "rights"

P

Publius

Guest
WinBySurrender said:
It matters not that I attend an SBC church and he attends a Catholic church. We have the same faith

No you don't. If you affirm the tenets held by the SBC and he affirms the tenets of Roman Catholicism, then you have a radically different understanding of justification, scriptural authority, and the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.

You might also be unaware that they have declared us "anathema" precisely because we don't have the same faith.

While I happen to agree with the Catholic Church on this issue and even believe that there are some Catholics who are Christians, to pretend that they're just another Christian denomination and that the differences that exist between us do not doesn't help you, them or those who may not know the difference.

Protestants seperated from the Catholic Church precisely because they could no longer honestly say that we hold to the same faith. Men died to defend Protestant theology because they understood that we do not hold to the same faith.

Can you honestly say that you believe in salvation by works? That sacraments are necessary for salvation? Can you honestly say that you believe the Magisterium has authority over scripture? Can you honestly say that you believe we go to Purgatory upon death to expiate our own sin? Can you honestly say that you believe in infused righteousness?

Likewise, do you really expect a Catholic to agree that we are saved by faith alone with no works or merit on our part? Do you really expect them to get on board with imputed righteousness or acknwoledge Christ's ability to keep us from falling and to keep that which the Father has given Him? Priesthood of the believer? Eternal security?

I love your posts and I have a lot of respect for you (I think I've even repped you once or twice) so I hope that, maybe, there's just more to your post than I'm picking up. If so, please tell me.

All that having been said, I believe the Catholic Church is exactly right in this instance.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
44
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
No you don't. If you affirm the tenets held by the SBC and he affirms the tenets of Roman Catholicism, then you have a radically different understanding of justification, scriptural authority, and the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.

Correct on only one and a half of those.

You might also be unaware that they have declared us "anathema" precisely because we don't have the same faith.

Incorrect. Check the CCC sometime...in how they officially interpret it, not how you think they do.

While I happen to agree with the Catholic Church on this issue and even believe that there are some Catholics who are Christians,

All of them are or this is a huge violation and false witness to boot...

to pretend that they're just another Christian denomination and that the differences that exist between us do not doesn't help you, them or those who may not know the difference.

You're right...they aren't just another Christian denomination; they're a valid church!

Protestants seperated from the Catholic Church precisely because they could no longer honestly say that we hold to the same faith. Men died to defend Protestant theology because they understood that we do not hold to the same faith.

That's a Hasty Generalization beyond belief...

Can you honestly say that you believe in salvation by works?

False witness...they do not believe in works alone. They condemn Pelagianism and Semipelagianism officially as heresies.

That sacraments are necessary for salvation?

Fallacy of Complex Question.

Can you honestly say that you believe the Magisterium has authority over scripture?

False witness...learn what the Magisterium is and isn't.

Can you honestly say that you believe we go to Purgatory upon death to expiate our own sin?

Um...again, false witness. They firmly teach that no one expiates their own sins.

Can you honestly say that you believe in infused righteousness?

...

Likewise, do you really expect a Catholic to agree that we are saved by faith alone with no works or merit on our part?

Um, you realize you are teaching against classic Protestant thought? Luther, Calvin...they decried Antinomianism...

Do you really expect them to get on board with imputed righteousness or acknwoledge Christ's ability to keep us from falling and to keep that which the Father has given Him? Priesthood of the believer? Eternal security?

Luther rejected eternal security.
The Vatican doesn't reject priesthood of all believers.
Not all Protestants are Calvinists, but all Calvinists are Protestants. You are suggesting all Protestants are Calvinists...that's false.

I love your posts and I have a lot of respect for you (I think I've even repped you once or twice) so I hope that, maybe, there's just more to your post than I'm picking up. If so, please tell me.

I think you need to recheck your sources...
 
Upvote 0

WinBySurrender

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2011
3,670
155
.
✟4,924.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
No you don't. If you affirm the tenets held by the SBC and he affirms the tenets of Roman Catholicism, then you have a radically different understanding of justification, scriptural authority, and the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.
I was actually referring to the earlier post in which I stated that all of my Catholic friends proclaim Christ as Savior and Lord. All of them believe in salvation (they don't call it that, but it's more the culture in which they were brought up than an effort to deny Christ's atoning power) by grace alone. I have met very, very few US Catholics who believe their works are what saves them, and I've probably met as many Baptists, Pentecostals and other protestants who think the same thing, so it's not a strictly Catholic error.
You might also be unaware that they have declared us "anathema" precisely because we don't have the same faith.
Vatican II actually affirmed Paul's statement in Ephesians that there is "one faith, one baptism" meaning by the the power of the Holy Spirit.
While I happen to agree with the Catholic Church on this issue and even believe that there are some Catholics who are Christians, to pretend that they're just another Christian denomination and that the differences that exist between us do not doesn't help you, them or those who may not know the difference.
It's important to separate the church from the Church. I find a greater likelihood that East Coast Catholics will remain married to the rote and ritual of the Mass and are also more likely to be works-based in their faith. Anyone, however, can get caught up in personal rituals that they think brings them closer to God. There isn't one denomination in the country that isn't guilty of that to one degree or another, and many in all denominations, including the Baptists and the Catholics, are likely not saved because their faith is not in Christ, but in rote and ritual. I prefer to take the long view based on the people I know, not the administrative realm of the RCC.
 
Upvote 0
P

Publius

Guest
I was actually referring to the earlier post in which I stated that all of my Catholic friends proclaim Christ as Savior and Lord.

But don't Mormons say the same thing?

All of them believe in salvation (they don't call it that, but it's more the culture in which they were brought up than an effort to deny Christ's atoning power) by grace alone.

But the Catholic Church doesn't.

I have met very, very few US Catholics who believe their works are what saves them

My experience is just the opposite. I've met very, very few who don't. When we go out witnessing, virtually every Catholic we talk to either says "I'm going to Heaven because I'm a good person", "I'm going to Heaven because I've been baptised", or "I'm going to Heaven because I belong to the 'one true church that Jesus founded'".

Vatican II actually affirmed Paul's statement in Ephesians that there is "one faith, one baptism" meaning by the the power of the Holy Spirit.

I disagree that this is what they interpret that phrase to mean. Like Mormons, Catholics use similar language, but define their terms differently than we do.

It's important to separate the church from the Church. I find a greater likelihood that East Coast Catholics will remain married to the rote and ritual of the Mass and are also more likely to be works-based in their faith. Anyone, however, can get caught up in personal rituals that they think brings them closer to God. There isn't one denomination in the country that isn't guilty of that to one degree or another, and many in all denominations, including the Baptists and the Catholics, are likely not saved because their faith is not in Christ, but in rote and ritual.

I agree, but the fact remains that if they affirm Catholic doctrine, they're affirming a different understanding of justification. That, in itself, is more than enough to say that they have a different gospel.

I prefer to take the long view based on the people I know, not the administrative realm of the RCC.

Do you say the same about Mormonism?
 
Upvote 0

Yarddog

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2008
17,154
4,379
Louisville, Ky
✟1,037,972.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Can you honestly say that you believe in salvation by works?
The Catholic Church has never believed in salvation by works, unless you refer to faith in the works of Jesus Christ.

That sacraments are necessary for salvation?
You don't believe in baptism? The Apostles taught that one must be baptized.

Can you honestly say that you believe the Magisterium has authority over scripture?
The catholic Church gave you the NT. It, though guidance of the Holy Spirit, put the books together which make up scripture. The Church does not have authority over the Holy Spirit but is guided to the truth by that Spirit.
Can you honestly say that you believe we go to Purgatory upon death to expiate our own sin? Can you honestly say that you believe in infused righteousness?
I leave that to theologians, whether you believe in infused or imputed God is the one through whom we receive either.
Likewise, do you really expect a Catholic to agree that we are saved by faith alone with no works or merit on our part?
We are justified by faith but without the works which God gives us to do, can we say that we have faith? The words "faith alone" do not appear in Paul's writings but he did preach the necessity for Christians to do the works which God has given us to do. How can one refuse to do these works and be saved? Christ said that you cannot.

Do you really expect them to get on board with imputed righteousness or acknwoledge Christ's ability to keep us from falling and to keep that which the Father has given Him?
There is an imputed righteousness which comes through baptism. We are washed clean by the blood of Christ. We are new born babes with the need to grow and to learn to walk in the Spirit. Christ has the ability to do anything but that doesn't mean that he will stop those who want to walk away from doing so.

The seed falls on many but not all who receive the message grow into fruit bearing trees. That is the Gospel. Nothing in scripture says that God will you from falling if you don't want to be caught.

Priesthood of the believer?
We are a priesthood. Scripture says that.

Eternal security?
Scripture does not say that. Jesus is our security and we must hold onto that tightly.
I love your posts and I have a lot of respect for you (I think I've even repped you once or twice) so I hope that, maybe, there's just more to your post than I'm picking up. If so, please tell me.
The Catholic Church has not issued an anathema on the Protestant Churches. She teaches that the Spirit of God is truly within many of those Churches which call themselves Protestant but I'm not sure the Baptist Churches, or at least not all of them, call themselves Protestant.

The Baptist of the time separated themselves from the reformation.

There is no doubt that there are differences in what the Catholic Church teaches and what the Southern Baptist Churches teach but we are still members of the One catholic Church founded by the Apostles and whose proof can be found through possession of the Holy Spirit.

God has given me his Holy Spirit and gifts of that Spirit as well. The Spirit came upon one day and revealed that we are all One. You cannot be One with God, Winbysurrender cannot be One with God and I cannot be One with God without us each also being One with each other. We may not recognize our brethren in this world but there will be no doubt in the next.

God Bless,
YD
 
Upvote 0

WinBySurrender

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2011
3,670
155
.
✟4,924.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
But don't Mormons say the same thing? ... Do you say the same about Mormonism?
Mormons say the same thing, but who Jesus is vs. who they say He is disqualifies their statement. And no, I don't say the same thing about Mormonism because I know the Catholic faithful are talking about the same Jesus I trust in for my salvation.
 
Upvote 0
P

Publius

Guest
The Catholic Church has never believed in salvation by works, unless you refer to faith in the works of Jesus Christ.

So then none of the sacraments are necessary for salvation?

You don't believe in baptism? The Apostles taught that one must be baptized.

None of the Apostles taught that baptism is a means of salvation.

The catholic Church gave you the NT.

Interesting theory.

The Church does not have authority over the Holy Spirit but is guided to the truth by that Spirit.

Is the Magisterium subject to the authority of scripture?

I leave that to theologians, whether you believe in infused or imputed God is the one through whom we receive either.

The Bible teaches imputed righteousness. The Catholic Church teaches infused righteousness.

We are justified by faith

So then, you don't believe that baptism is necessary for salvation?

he did preach the necessity for Christians to do the works which God has given us to do. How can one refuse to do these works and be saved? Christ said that you cannot.

OK. Show us the verses where Paul said we must do works to earn our salvation.

There is an imputed righteousness which comes through baptism.
Verse?

We are washed clean by the blood of Christ.

And yet, in spite of that, you still believe you must go to Purgatory to expiate your sin.

We are new born babes with the need to grow and to learn to walk in the Spirit. Christ has the ability to do anything but that doesn't mean that he will stop those who want to walk away from doing so.

If our carnal nature has been crucified with Christ and is dead and we have received a new nature upon regeneration, then where does the Bible ever say that we can give up the new nature we received upon regeneration? And why would a person who had received this new nature want to give it up? Isn't the formost characteristic of the new nature that it is spiritual and not carnal?

And, for that matter, what replaces the new nature if one can give it up, since the old nature is dead? Do you get a new old nature? And, if so, how?

How does one give up this nature? Is it like an Islamic divorce, where you just announce, "I divorce you" three times? Is there a document to sign or a ritual to perform?

Think about the consequences of rejecting the Biblical doctrine of eternal security for a moment. If we could really lose (or choose to give up) our salvation, then Hebrews 6:4-6 says that if we ever sin after being saved, we'll be lost forever with no way back, because the Lord would have to be crucified all over again to retrieve us. BTW, it only takes one sin to fall away, right? I mean, one sin before we're saved was enough to condemn us, so one sin after we're saved is enough to condemn us, right? Doesn't this make the New Covenant worse than the Old? Under the Old Covenant, the Israelites were condemned for their actions, but we'd be condemned for our thoughts.

Under the Old Covenant, under the law, the Israelites couldn't murder. We couldn't even be angry. They couldn't commit adultery. We couldn't even have a lustful thought. If you're right, then we lose our salvation by doing less in following the law than the Israelites did!

Is this really the Good News of Jesus Christ? Are these the riches of His Grace, that we have to live in fear of sinning? Are we saved by grace only to be placed under the constraints of an even more severely administered law?

And what of Romans 8:29-30, which says that God predestined those whom He foreknew to be conformed to the image of Christ. If we can lose our salvation and, thus, our conformity to the image of Christ, then does this mean that God's foreknowledge is wrong? That's open theism, which has historically been condemned as heresy by the Church.

How about Jude 24, which says that Christ is able to keep us from falling? If we can lose our salvation, does this mean that Christ is able to keep us from falling, but is merely unwilling? How is that consistent with the Biblical description of Christ?

What do you make of Colosians 3:1-4, which promises that if we have been save, we will appear with Christ in glory? It doesn't say "you might appear with Christ in glory, if you don't lose your salvation". It says "you will appear with Christ in glory". Done deal.

Philipians 1:6 promises us that if Christ has begun a good work in us, that He will finish it. How does He keep that promise if you believe you can lose your salvation?

How do you explain 1 Peter 1:23, which tells us that when we are born again, we are born of incorruptable seed? If we can lose our salvation, then this seed is corruptable and that promise is not true.

Like Colosians 3:1-4, 1 John 3:2 says that we are sons of God now and that when Christ appears, we will be like Him. There is no qualifier. There is no "...if we don't lose our salvation".

Titus 1:2 says that God has promised us eternal life and that He never breaks a promise.

In John 10:27-29, Jesus promises us that He has given us eternal life, that we will never perish, and that we are not only in His hands, but in the Father's hands. How is Jesus' promise in John 10:27-28 consistent with the idea that we can lose our salvation? Is Jesus really incompetent to keep those whom the Father has given Him?

John 5:24 says that if we are saved, we will not come into condemnation but will have eternal life? How can Jesus promise that we will not come into condemnation if He knows we can lose our salvation?

Romans 11:6 tells us that salvation is not by works. If we cannot be saved by works, then how can we lose our salvation by works?

John 14:16-17 tells us that when we are saved, the Holy Spirit indwells us forever. How can the Holy Spirit indwell in us forever if we lose our salvation? Since when does the Holy Spirit dwell in the unsaved?

Ephesians 1:13, 4:30 tells us that we are sealed unto the day of redemption. If we lose our salvation, then how can we still claim to be sealed?

1 Peter 1:4 says that our salvation is "imperishable, undefiled, and unfading". If our salvation is imperishable, how can we lose it? If our salvation is promised by God to be undefiled, how can we defile it?

The seed falls on many but not all who receive the message grow into fruit bearing trees. That is the Gospel. Nothing in scripture says that God will you from falling if you don't want to be caught.

Read that passage again. The tares are not saved in the first place.

We are a priesthood. Scripture says that.

Then you believe in the priesthood of the believer?

Scripture does not say that.

Think about the consequences of rejecting the Biblical doctrine of eternal security for a moment. If we could really lose (or choose to give up) our salvation, then Hebrews 6:4-6 says that if we ever sin after being saved, we'll be lost forever with no way back, because the Lord would have to be crucified all over again to retrieve us. BTW, it only takes one sin to fall away, right? I mean, one sin before we're saved was enough to condemn us, so one sin after we're saved is enough to condemn us, right? Doesn't this make the New Covenant worse than the Old? Under the Old Covenant, the Israelites were condemned for their actions, but we'd be condemned for our thoughts.

Under the Old Covenant, under the law, the Israelites couldn't murder. We couldn't even be angry. They couldn't commit adultery. We couldn't even have a lustful thought. If you're right, then we lose our salvation by doing less in following the law than the Israelites did!

Is this really the Good News of Jesus Christ? Are these the riches of His Grace, that we have to live in fear of sinning? Are we saved by grace only to be placed under the constraints of an even more severely administered law?

And what of Romans 8:29-30, which says that God predestined those whom He foreknew to be conformed to the image of Christ. If we can lose our salvation and, thus, our conformity to the image of Christ, then does this mean that God's foreknowledge is wrong? That's open theism, which has historically been condemned as heresy by the Church.

How about Jude 24, which says that Christ is able to keep us from falling? If we can lose our salvation, does this mean that Christ is able to keep us from falling, but is merely unwilling? How is that consistent with the Biblical description of Christ?

What do you make of Colosians 3:1-4, which promises that if we have been save, we will appear with Christ in glory? It doesn't say "you might appear with Christ in glory, if you don't lose your salvation". It says "you will appear with Christ in glory". Done deal.

Philipians 1:6 promises us that if Christ has begun a good work in us, that He will finish it. How does He keep that promise if you believe you can lose your salvation?

How do you explain 1 Peter 1:23, which tells us that when we are born again, we are born of incorruptable seed? If we can lose our salvation, then this seed is corruptable and that promise is not true.

Like Colosians 3:1-4, 1 John 3:2 says that we are sons of God now and that when Christ appears, we will be like Him. There is no qualifier. There is no "...if we don't lose our salvation".

Titus 1:2 says that God has promised us eternal life and that He never breaks a promise.

In John 10:27-29, Jesus promises us that He has given us eternal life, that we will never perish, and that we are not only in His hands, but in the Father's hands. How is Jesus' promise in John 10:27-28 consistent with the idea that we can lose our salvation? Is Jesus really incompetent to keep those whom the Father has given Him?

John 5:24 says that if we are saved, we will not come into condemnation but will have eternal life? How can Jesus promise that we will not come into condemnation if He knows we can lose our salvation?

Romans 11:6 tells us that salvation is not by works. If we cannot be saved by works, then how can we lose our salvation by works?

John 14:16-17 tells us that when we are saved, the Holy Spirit indwells us forever. How can the Holy Spirit indwell in us forever if we lose our salvation? Since when does the Holy Spirit dwell in the unsaved?

Ephesians 1:13, 4:30 tells us that we are sealed unto the day of redemption. If we lose our salvation, then how can we still claim to be sealed?

1 Peter 1:4 says that our salvation is "imperishable, undefiled, and unfading". If our salvation is imperishable, how can we lose it? If our salvation is promised by God to be undefiled, how can we defile it?

Jesus is our security and we must hold onto that tightly.

If our salvation is dependent upon our ability to "hold on", then it's our ability to hold on that is our security, not Christ.

The difference is that you believe in your ability to hold on to Christ. We believe in Christ's ability to hold on to us.

The Catholic Church has not issued an anathema on the Protestant Churches.

I'll give you a hint: it's in the Council of Trent.

There is no doubt that there are differences in what the Catholic Church teaches and what the Southern Baptist Churches teach but we are still members of the One catholic Church founded by the Apostles and whose proof can be found through possession of the Holy Spirit.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe we are.

God has given me his Holy Spirit and gifts of that Spirit as well. The Spirit came upon one day and revealed that we are all One. You cannot be One with God, Winbysurrender cannot be One with God and I cannot be One with God without us each also being One with each other. We may not recognize our brethren in this world but there will be no doubt in the next.

I disagree. The Bible has given us four primary ways by which we can "recognize our bretheren":

a) By their testimony
b) By their doctrine
c) By their fruits
d) By their sanctification
 
Upvote 0
P

Publius

Guest
Mormons say the same thing, but who Jesus is vs. who they say He is disqualifies their statement. And no, I don't say the same thing about Mormonism because I know the Catholic faithful are talking about the same Jesus I trust in for my salvation.

They may be talking about the same Jesus, but what good is talking about the same Jesus if they're talking about a different justification?
 
Upvote 0

WinBySurrender

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2011
3,670
155
.
✟4,924.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
They may be talking about the same Jesus, but what good is talking about the same Jesus if they're talking about a different justification?
Those who are Catholic Christians by grace alone through faith are not talking about a different justification. I do not care what Rome preaches. I care about what the guy and gal in the pew believe, and trust me, most American Catholics do not buy into works-based salvation.
 
Upvote 0

judechild

Catholic Socratic
Jul 5, 2009
2,661
204
The Jesuit War-Room
✟26,369.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Unfortunately, I'm not sure the Roman Catholic Church has a great case here. The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that, in cases of true medical urgency, the State has the right to suspend religious liberties on the grounds of sound medical practice to protect and save lives.

There certainly is no true medical urgency in contraception and sterilization, but more importantly is that this is a different case. The HHS mandate would require Catholic institutions to go into the market and buy a product that is contrary to their beliefs. All the people emplyed by Catholic institutions have an employment contract to do the job for x salery and y benefits. The mandate requires the Church to offer y + z benefits. That has never been done before.

It's not a matter of true medical urgency, because the mandate is not about healthcare itself; it's about what is paid for by employers.
 
Upvote 0
P

Publius

Guest
Those who are Catholic Christians by grace alone through faith are not talking about a different justification. I do not care what Rome preaches. I care about what the guy and gal in the pew believe, and trust me, most American Catholics do not buy into works-based salvation.

I've got to disagree with you on this one. The fact that they choose to remain in the RCC and affirm RCC doctrines shows that they must also affirm the RCC's doctrines concerning justification.

To me, this isn't very different from what we just saw this with T.D. Jakes and the Elephant Room Conference.

If they don't buy into it, then they should come out and reject it.
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
44
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Those who are Catholic Christians by grace alone through faith are not talking about a different justification. I do not care what Rome preaches. I care about what the guy and gal in the pew believe, and trust me, most American Catholics do not buy into works-based salvation.

Actually, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is authoritative in matters of Vatican Catholic doctrine, makes it very clear their church unquestionably teaches salvation by grace alone. Do not listen to Publius; he is bearing false witness and, if you were to actually read the Catechism or go to OBOB and ask the folks there, you'll see that what I am telling you is the truth.
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
44
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
There certainly is no true medical urgency in contraception and sterilization, but more importantly is that this is a different case. The HHS mandate would require Catholic institutions to go into the market and buy a product that is contrary to their beliefs. All the people emplyed by Catholic institutions have an employment contract to do the job for x salery and y benefits. The mandate requires the Church to offer y + z benefits. That has never been done before.

It's not a matter of true medical urgency, because the mandate is not about healthcare itself; it's about what is paid for by employers.

Which is why I had the second paragraph which explained a possible counterargument.
 
Upvote 0

Yarddog

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2008
17,154
4,379
Louisville, Ky
✟1,037,972.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
So then none of the sacraments are necessary for salvation?
Well, we believe that you guys can receive salvation, so what does that say. We believe that you have a valid baptism. Do you ask God to forgive you when you know that you have sinned or you ? Do you try to make up for sinning against another person by going them and asking for forgiveness or do you thumb your nose at them?

None of the Apostles taught that baptism is a means of salvation.
Are we or are we not "baptized" into the body of Christ?
Romans 6:3
Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

Interesting theory.
No theory. The Apostles and disciples wrote the books of the NT and were there at the foundation of the catholic Church. The Church later came together to chose which of the sacred writings should go into the codex we call the Holy Bible.

Is the Magisterium subject to the authority of scripture?
Scripture is part of holy tradition and cannot be contradicted.


The Bible teaches imputed righteousness.
That is how some theologians began to interpret scripture around the 16th century.
The Catholic Church teaches infused righteousness.
The ancient Church, which includes both Catholic and Orthodox Churches taught infused righteousness which the Apostles handed down to them.

So then, you don't believe that baptism is necessary for salvation?
Scripture teaches that baptism is necessary so yes, baptism is necessary. By faith, we do what Jesus taught us to do.

OK. Show us the verses where Paul said we must do works to earn our salvation.
I didn't say that we must "earn" our salvation. Man cannot "earn" anything. Works must be present. Not works which man does but the works which God does through man. They are God's works in man.

1 Cor. 6:11
And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.
And yet, in spite of that, you still believe you must go to Purgatory to expiate your sin.
Must? No. Purgatory is the state of purification for those that need it before entering heaven. Let's say that committed a sin which you did not feel remorse for and did not ask God for forgiveness. You are cleansed of that sin before entering heaven.

If our carnal nature has been crucified with Christ and is dead and we have received a new nature upon regeneration, then where does the Bible ever say that we can give up the new nature we received upon regeneration?
Why do you think that Paul kept warning all of the churches that he founded to not embrace the law "again" or as he said to the Galatians: "I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by [the] grace [of Christ] for a different gospel" and "O stupid Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?"
And why would a person who had received this new nature want to give it up? Isn't the formost characteristic of the new nature that it is spiritual and not carnal?
Though we are born of the Spirit we are still flesh and life is a battle with that flesh. Some are better than others because the spirit is stronger but the weak or those that scripture describes it:
17 But it does not sink deep into them, and they don't last long. So when trouble or persecution comes because of the message, they give up at once.
18 Other people are like the seeds sown among the thorn bushes. These are the ones who hear the message,
19 but the worries about this life, the love for riches, and all other kinds of desires crowd in and choke the message, and they don't bear fruit.

Yes there are those that receive the message but at some point in their lives turn away from the Gospel.
And, for that matter, what replaces the new nature if one can give it up, since the old nature is dead? Do you get a new old nature? And, if so, how?
Just because a person is baptized in Christ does not mean that their human nature is dead. Many battle with that nature throughout their Christian lives. God gave us his Holy Spirit so that by living in that Spirit, we can put sin to death.

Not all who receive God's Spirit will learn to live by that Spirit. Paul is talking to Christians when he warns them: " For if you live according to your human nature, you are going to die; but if by the Spirit you put to death your sinful actions, you will live."

Paul said that this is a race which must be run until the finish. "Surely you know that many runners take part in a race, but only one of them wins the prize. Run, then, in such a way as to win the prize..." and "Run your best in the race of faith, and win eternal life for yourself; for it was to this life that God called you when you firmly professed your faith before many witnesses." and when he knew that he would soon be martyred "I have done my best in the race, I have run the full distance, and I have kept the faith."

Paul did not teach that Christians could not fall away but taught throughout his epistles that we could fall if we turned away from the Gospel.
How does one give up this nature? Is it like an Islamic divorce, where you just announce, "I divorce you" three times? Is there a document to sign or a ritual to perform?
Maybe, but many people become disenchanted and simply fall away. The seed spouted but weeds choked them off. That great feeling that they experienced when they received the Holy Spirit fades slowly away until the light does not shine.
Think about the consequences of rejecting the Biblical doctrine of eternal security for a moment. If we could really lose (or choose to give up) our salvation, then Hebrews 6:4-6 says that if we ever sin after being saved, we'll be lost forever with no way back, because the Lord would have to be crucified all over again to retrieve us.
Committing a sin and turning away from God are not the same things. Paul is warning the Jews not to embrace the law as their means of justification again in Hebrews 6. Many many Christians turned away from the Gospel in the early Church. Jews returned to Judaism and pagans returned to their false gods.

Since this was too long, I had to break it up into two posts.
 
Upvote 0

Yarddog

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2008
17,154
4,379
Louisville, Ky
✟1,037,972.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
BTW, it only takes one sin to fall away, right?
Who taught you that?

I mean, one sin before we're saved was enough to condemn us, so one sin after we're saved is enough to condemn us, right? Doesn't this make the New Covenant worse than the Old? Under the Old Covenant, the Israelites were condemned for their actions, but we'd be condemned for our thoughts.
Under the Old, one sin condemned you but they could be forgiven by penance or atonement through sacrifices. We have the one sacrifice through which we can find forgiveness for our sins. We sin today, we can find forgiveness, we sin tomorrow, we can find forgiveness. Hopefully we mature as Christians and learn to walk and run in the Spirit.

Is this really the Good News of Jesus Christ?

It is for me.:amen:

Are these the riches of His Grace, that we have to live in fear of sinning?

I don't fear sinning because I have a brother in heaven who intercedes for me. Through Jesus we find forgiveness.
Are we saved by grace only to be placed under the constraints of an even more severely administered law?
If you think that forgiveness for sins is a constraint, have at it.
And what of Romans 8:29-30, which says that God predestined those whom He foreknew to be conformed to the image of Christ. If we can lose our salvation and, thus, our conformity to the image of Christ, then does this mean that God's foreknowledge is wrong? That's open theism, which has historically been condemned as heresy by the Church.
Open theism has to do with man's free will which has not been condemned but what Calvin did was base his theology on parts of scripture and discount others. God cannot be wrong he did predestine to be conformed when Christ came but he also said that not all who hear the Gospel and who sprout will bear fruit.
How about Jude 24, which says that Christ is able to keep us from falling?
:thumbsup: God is able to keep us from falling if we don't turn away from him. If we choose another path, he does not stop us.
If we can lose our salvation, does this mean that Christ is able to keep us from falling, but is merely unwilling? How is that consistent with the Biblical description of Christ?
I guess that you just need to read scripture more. Christ is our brother but he says, "Not everyone who calls me "Lord, Lord' will enter the Kingdom of heaven, but only those who do what my Father in heaven wants them to do."
What do you make of Colosians 3:1-4, which promises that if we have been save, we will appear with Christ in glory? It doesn't say "you might appear with Christ in glory, if you don't lose your salvation". It says "you will appear with Christ in glory". Done deal.
Then why does he say in the verses right after those:"Put to death, then, the parts of you that are earthly: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and the greed that is idolatry. Because of these the wrath of God is coming [upon the disobedient]. By these you too once conducted yourselves, when you lived in that way. [/b]But now you must put them all away[/b]: anger, fury, malice, slander, and obscene language out of your mouths."

If one only uses a few verses, taken out of context, to build a theology and not reading them all, false theology arises. Yes, we have a promise but that promise is for those who remain in faith.

Philipians 1:6 promises us that if Christ has begun a good work in us, that He will finish it. How does He keep that promise if you believe you can lose your salvation?
Paul does not say anything about promise, he says that he is "confident". That is not "I promise". Paul's letters were meant to encourage the Christians in the Churches which he sent them. Encourage them that Jesus was faithful to us and that we should remain faithful to Jesus.

Paul urges them: "So then, my beloved, obedient as you have always been, not only when I am present but all the more now when I am absent, work out your salvation with fear and trembling. For God is the one who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work. Do everything without grumbling or questioning, that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine like lights in the world, as you hold on to the word of life, so that my boast for the day of Christ may be that I did not run in vain or labor in vain."

Yes, Paul knew that not all would remain in faith but that some would fall away. If he knew that all who received Christ would remain in Christ, he would not have to have continually warned them from falling into sin or how to behave as Christians.
Therefore, its value is for you who have faith, but for those without faith: “The stone which the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,”

How do you explain 1 Peter 1:23, which tells us that when we are born again, we are born of incorruptable seed? If we can lose our salvation, then this seed is corruptable and that promise is not true. [/quote]
The seed is incorruptible but what is the seed? The seed produces fruit but is that fruit good and does it survive. Not according to the Gospel.

Peter goes on to say: "who by the power of God are safeguarded through faith, to a salvation that is ready to be revealed in the final time. In this you rejoice, although now for a little while you may have to suffer through various trials, so that the genuineness of your faith, more precious than gold that is perishable even though tested by fire, may prove to be for praise, glory, and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ."

Will all people's faith, who have gone through the trials prove to be genuine?

Peter says: "Therefore, gird up the loins of your mind, live soberly, and set your hopes completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. Like obedient children, do not act in compliance with the desires of your former ignorance but, as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in every aspect of your conduct, for it is written, “Be holy because I [am] holy.”

" Rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, insincerity, envy, and all slander; like newborn infants, long for pure spiritual milk so that through it you may grow into salvation, for you have tasted that the Lord is good. Come to him, a living stone, rejected by human beings but chosen and precious in the sight of God, and, like living stones, let yourselves be built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ....Therefore, its value is for you who have faith, but for those without faith: “The stone which the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,”




Yes, it is so important to remain in faith.

Read that passage again. The tares are not saved in the first place.
I suggest that you read the right parable. Jesus explains the parable of the sower:
20. The seed sown on rocky ground is the one who hears the word and receives it at once with joy.
21. But he has no root and lasts only for a time. When some tribulation or persecution comes because of the word, he immediately falls away.
22. The seed sown among thorns is the one who hears the word, but then worldly anxiety and the lure of riches choke the word and it bears no fruit.

23. But the seed sown on rich soil is the one who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and yields a hundred or sixty or thirtyfold.”

Many people hear the Gospel and turn to Christ for salvation and are baptized into the body but fall away for various reasons. No one can tell who these people are until they fall away. I have heard many many people doing this over the many years that I have been around.

Then you believe in the priesthood of the believer?
The Catholic Church teaches that we are a priesthood.

Think about the consequences of rejecting the Biblical doctrine of eternal security for a moment.
Since there is no biblical doctrine of eternal security, I don't have to reject it. What scripture teaches is salvation for those who have faith.

If our salvation is dependent upon our ability to "hold on", then it's our ability to hold on that is our security, not Christ.
Tell that to Paul and Peter who said that we need to remain in faith. Don't give up, trust in the saving grace of Jesus Christ when the world throws all of its worldly things at you. It is Christ, not us.
The difference is that you believe in your ability to hold on to Christ. We believe in Christ's ability to hold on to us.
No, I know of my weakness and know that I have to remain humble before the Lord, knowing that only through his help can I receive the promise of eternal salvation.
I'll give you a hint: it's in the Council of Trent.
If you understood Trent, you would know that it is not. The conditions set forth in Trent, apply to only those which it was intended to apply to.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe we are.
That doesn't mean that you are not. You are either in the body of Christ or not. If you are not in the body of Christ then you are not a Christian. If you notice, I did not capitalize the "c" in catholic.


I disagree. The Bible has given us four primary ways by which we can "recognize our bretheren":

a) By their testimony
b) By their doctrine
c) By their fruits
d) By their sanctification
That then shows that you lack the perception which comes with the maturity of the Holy Spirit. We are called to grow and stop relying on the milk which infants drink. Grow and start eating solid food.
 
Upvote 0

Yarddog

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2008
17,154
4,379
Louisville, Ky
✟1,037,972.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Those who are Catholic Christians by grace alone through faith are not talking about a different justification. I do not care what Rome preaches. I care about what the guy and gal in the pew believe, and trust me, most American Catholics do not buy into works-based salvation.
Rome does not teach a works-based salvation. It is a gift which cannot be earned by works of man. Man cannot find God without God making it possible in every way.

God did call man into works through. Not works to justify ourselves but works which find their genesis in the Spirit of God. Thus, they are not our works but belong to God.

Walking in the Spirit is letting go of all that is worldly and embracing Jesus Christ and turning over our spirits to the control of the Holy Spirit, who lives within God's children. But many Christians of all of our Churches don't get this message.

Hopefully, more people will be able to see as your spirit does and recognize the Holy Spirit in people who belong to other Christian Churches. I know of many Catholics who fail at this.

It great to chat,
God Bless
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fireinfolding
Upvote 0

WinBySurrender

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2011
3,670
155
.
✟4,924.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Rome does not teach a works-based salvation. It is a gift which cannot be earned by works of man. Man cannot find God without God making it possible in every way.

God did call man into works through. Not works to justify ourselves but works which find their genesis in the Spirit of God. Thus, they are not our works but belong to God.

Walking in the Spirit is letting go of all that is worldly and embracing Jesus Christ and turning over our spirits to the control of the Holy Spirit, who lives within God's children. But many Christians of all of our Churches don't get this message.

Hopefully, more people will be able to see as your spirit does and recognize the Holy Spirit in people who belong to other Christian Churches. I know of many Catholics who fail at this.

It great to chat,
God Bless
Amen, 'Dog. Thanks for the clarification, and its great to chat with you, too. (Especially with no "yelling")

^_^ :thumbsup: :cool:
 
Upvote 0
P

Publius

Guest
Rome does not teach a works-based salvation. It is a gift which cannot be earned by works of man. Man cannot find God without God making it possible in every way.

God did call man into works through. Not works to justify ourselves but works which find their genesis in the Spirit of God. Thus, they are not our works but belong to God.

Walking in the Spirit is letting go of all that is worldly and embracing Jesus Christ and turning over our spirits to the control of the Holy Spirit, who lives within God's children. But many Christians of all of our Churches don't get this message.

Hopefully, more people will be able to see as your spirit does and recognize the Holy Spirit in people who belong to other Christian Churches. I know of many Catholics who fail at this.

It great to chat,
God Bless

Just a few thoughts from the fellas at the Council of Trent:

CANON 9 said:
"If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema."

CANON 12 said:
"If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ's sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified; let him be accursed"

Canon 14 said:
"If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."

Canon 23 said:
"lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,- except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema."

Canon 24 said:
"If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema."

Canon 30 said:
"If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema."

Canon 33 said:
"If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.

Do these things really sound consistent with Yarddog's claim that the Catholic Church "does not teach a works-based salvation. It is a gift which cannot be earned by works of man"?
 
Upvote 0