You are right that God does not lie but maybe you need to take this up with the Apostle Paul:
“God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.
What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things.
I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith inChrist—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.”
I agree with all those verses. I believe God made me truly righteous when I repented of my sins and put my faith in Christ. That righteousness came as a result Jesus' sacrifice on the cross. Although I consider myself truly righteous in reality, I agree that righteousness did not come from myself or my own good deeds but because of my faith in Christ.
a person who has an allegiance to the Kingdom will continue to repent away from these acts.
Where does scripture teach that? If it were true, why did Paul warn believers multiple times that they won't inherit eternal life if they continue in their sins if it was a given they would repent of those sins?
A continued and un-repentant practice of these things reveals the truth about a persons heart.
I agree. It shows he doesn't love God even though he may still have faith in Jesus.
The Spirit is not with them and those who do not have the Spirit of Christ do not belong to Christ.
I agree. A person who willfully chooses to commit a grave sin such as adultery has preferred that sin over Christ and severed his relationship with God. The Spirit of Christ will not continue to reside in him against his will.
Nevertheless for one who is guilty of these acts who, because of the Spirit within them, wishes to repent, there is always forgiveness and Love.
I agree those who commit any sin and repent can always receive forgiveness and love. However, if they don't repent, they won't receive eternal life even if they continue to believe in Jesus.
As an example; the Dogma of Immaculate conception (Given Ex-Cathedra) is unscriptural and completely unnecessary for faith in Christ Jesus. The medical reasoning behind it is also incorrect.
I agree the Dogma of Immaculate conception is not explicitly taught in scripture and that it's not necessary to know to have faith in Christ. Prior to the Reformation when the tradition of sola scriptura did not yet exist, Christians considered the Church to be the source of divinely revealed truth. Rejecting a dogma meant a rejection of the Church. If that person believed the church to teach what God revealed (the only source of the Christian faith for most of Christian history), then it is a rejection of God. Therefore, the problem with a Catholic rejecting the dogma isn't that it's particularly important or necessary to believe but that he has rejected Jesus Christ by refusing to assent to what he believes God revealed through the Church. It also explains why those who are innocently unaware the Dogma of Immaculate conception is divinely revealed truth will not be held accountable for not believing it.
There is no laity in Christ the NT does not instruct any laity. In fact the practice of the Nicolaitans (from whence we get the word) is specifically condemned. There are appointed Bishops and we are told to submit ourselves in humility because that is what one does to a person in leadership. We are also told to submit to one another in humility.
Suppose you believe baptism is unnecessary for salvation but your bishop told you water baptism was necessary for salvation, would you humbly submit to the bishop's teaching and accept the necessity of water baptism for salvation?
“But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.”
Yes, there is also a universal priesthood of all believers. Although all believers are priests, that does not mean there is not a ministerial priesthood.
An analogy would be a ship owner that promoted us all to Captain with all that entails (responsibility and authority) but then appoints the most experienced Captain to be a Commodore Captain among Captains. This would not work in the sinful world, but it would work in a world where all of these people submitted to each other in Love, as is the way of Christ
Do you actually submit to your bishop when you have a disagreement over doctrine? If your believed in faith alone but your bishop told you that was not enough that works were necessary would you humbly submit or leave and find another bishop somewhere else who agrees with you?
All of the religious groups that have come out of the Way of Christ with vertical authority structures have lost faith in His example and are following the ways of evil men.
Submission to bishops is a vertical authority structure and the church that has maintained this structure from the beginning has the same faith it had in the beginning.
So now we are left with the subjective memories and opinions of men?
Nope. Oral tradition is more reliable than books because you can pass along the faith directly instead of having to interpret a book increasingly removed from one's culture and language. They didn't just whisper the faith in someone's ear one time like some schools had kids do to attempt to how oral traditions are unreliable. They instructed them and made sure they understood. When a bishop appeared to change something, there were protests and that bishop was corrected by the rest of the church. The fact their successors are in agreement is solid evidence the tradition was preserved faithfully.
I trust Christ and I trust the written record of the Apostles, but I do not trust these men.
The apostles were men. The books in your bible were chosen by men. Those men were all catholic orthodox Christians who taught oral tradition.
“Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.”
The New Testament wasn't written yet and since they were Jews they examined the Old Testament to see whether Paul's teaching about Jesus being the Messiah was true. Once they saw that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies in the scriptures they already accepted, they accepted Paul's message. Did you think they scrutinized the New Testament, not believing anything Paul taught unless they were able to confirm it in one of those books?
This teaching flys directly in the face of the Apostle who wrote: If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?
Since it's harder to manage the church, someone who can't manage their own family obviously shouldn't manage something more difficult than what he can handle. But that verse says nothing about those who are unmarried and don't have a family.
It is quite simply not an apostolic teaching.
If the church decides to choose an unmarried person to be a priest instead of a married priest, that is a practice, not a doctrine or teaching.
Furthermore this practice has been recognised for over 500 years as a major cause of the sexual perversion that plagues the RC denomination.
No it hasn't. Protestants claim that without one shred of evidence.
Perhaps it wasn’t intended to include everything (I don’t buy that though) but these teachings were obviously not important enough to write about in comparison to the teachings that we have objectively in writing.
None of the New Testament books were about Mary so there would have been no reason to include any Marian dogmas. Therefore, it's not reasonable to conclude those dogmas are not important.
I’m sorry but I don’t buy the interpretation excuse when it comes to Christ Jesus crucified, dead and resurrected, and His status as Lord. It is repeated so often so clearly and in so man y different ways throughout the whole the Letters and Gospels of the Apostles, as well as the Revelation it would take particularly perverse person to genuinely misinterpret the message that is first given.
Scripture is interpreted in so many different ways by Protestants it is ridiculous. Protestants can't even agree on the essential teachings about salvation. The majority of Protestants I know hold blatantly anti-scriptural opinions based on their personal interpretations with faith alone and OSAS being the worst. Those two erroneous interpretations alone will probably result in millions of people going to hell.
This quote did not originate on the web, it comes from a much earlier source. The source is Pope Innocent the 3rd Papal Bull, 1198 where he sayse: "Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts with Church dogma must be burned without pity." The same lovely man also said: “Kill them all, for God knows His own.”
If you got that from reading the papal bull, it should be in Latin. Is that your personal translation or did you quote it from someone else? Is it from Pope Innocent I or another Pope Innocent? What is the name of the 3rd bull he issued so I can look it up?
Hilarious! If it wasn’t so downright delusional.
What on earth is the Inquisition for if it isn’t for stamping out so called heresy, and what do you think they used all of those instruments of torture for, playing tiddly winks? The Papacy cannot claim absolute authority over Europe and the world and then just side step the issue of millions of murders under its rule by saying “the state did it”. Even if you could argue that the Papcy didn’t do it the first rule of authority is responsibility and the Papacy at the very least allowed millions of people to be slaughtered at the hands of vicious perverted psychopaths without so much as lifting a finger. The Vatican record itself shows the truth of the matter in that the so called Vicar of Christ in fact often chose to serve the evil one in some of the most despicable ways of man.
If you can provide a reliable source, I'm willing to consider it but not if it's from anti-catholic propaganda sites run by people full of hate.
Oh dear:"The Pope cannot make a mistake." Pope Gregory VII, (quoted by The Benedictine Network in a listing of notable items by the various popes throughout history)
“Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil; for no one may judge the Pope. “ Innocent III
"I alone...am the successor of the apostles, the vicar of Jesus Christ..I am the way, the truth, and the life..." Pope Pius IV
What is the source of your quotes?
I researched similar quotes in the past and they turned out to be false so I don't want to waste my time doing that again. I learned there are many hateful people who will say anything to slander the church. They had to lie because they were unable to refute anything the catholic church actually taught.
Unity come through humility and gentleness, bearing with one another in Love. I know this because I have experienced it on a number of occasions.
I agree. Even atheists can be united to each other so I'm not sure what that proves.
Religious establishments I have observed that concern themselves with what everybody believes more than these things are not unified in the Spirit. They are the social clubs that people turn up to for a service or 2 every week and then go home having nothing to do with one another.
I prefer to be united with Christ and to fellowship with others willing to believe what He taught.
So what then do we do with this ...? “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.” Pope Pius V
Recognize it as a false quote that some bitter anti-catholic posted on an anti-christian website to slander the church. I notice no source was provided. Those sites tend to not post sources.
I think it would be wise to simply walk away from such a dangerous lunatic before he starts threatening burnings and torture.
He has revealed this: Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.
I agree Jesus revealed that but he also revealed many other things such as that a person who has great faith that can move mountains is nothing if he has not love and that loving God involves obeying His commandments which is necessary for salvation.
Proud men who do not know the God of Love have lead to disunity.
I agree 100% of that. Luther and Calvin really harmed the church and even caused a war that killed thousands, maybe millions. It's sad so many will end up in hell because of their false teachings.
The core teaching of the original Protestants is salvation by faith alone
Luther's tradition of faith alone led, by his own admission, to a huge decline in morality as people no longer felt the need to obey God to escape eternal punishment in hell.
as is most clearly outlined in the letters to the Roman church and the letter to the Galatian church.
I read those letters many times. It's not taught there except in Luther's bible but only because he added the word alone based on his own self-proclaimed authority.
But this is irrelevant anyway, who are the original Protestants?
Luther. I encourage you to read the early Christian writings because you will see quite clearly they were definitely not Protestant.
We live by the Spirit of Christ, not the Protestant tradition.
Faith alone is a man-made Protestant tradition that is in opposition to the Spirit of Christ. I hope you see that someday.
Certainly the documentation that we have that supports the writings of the Apostles and provide cultural context to hermeneutics has lead to changes in the understanding of many, but the clear message and example of Christ Jesus has not changed one iota from the day that Paul penned his letter to the Corinthians. This is the message that was first received and God forbid that we should accept anything else. Certainly the Spirit makes my heart jangle harshly when I hear anything contrary to the Gospel message, even if it is wrapped up in the sweetest of sentiments and I can’t see what’s wrong with it.
The writings of those who determined which books were scripture did not believe in faith alone but taught the exact opposite. I'm reminded of Newman's quote "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."
What's funny is when I show Protestants what the ECFs taught they reject them for teaching "a false gospel of works righteousness" yet they quote the same fathers as the source for the bible they claim is the basis of their faith.
The letters to the seven churches identify them as seven manifestations of the church in 7 different locations.
Since Jesus only founded one church, those 7 parishes all taught and believed the same Christian faith. They were not 7 individual churches that taught a variety of opinions that contradicted what the other churches taught.
Further to this the Roman church is clearly not of consequence enough for Christ to even mention it as one of his seven significant churches.
The Roman church was praised for it's faithfulness in the book of Romans. It did not need correction like those 7 churches mentioned in Revelation.
There is no confusion about the one thing that matters ergo Christ crucified and risen from the dead for the salvation of all who believe.
The problem is popular Protestant belief and trust is not enough for salvation and I sincerely hope Protestants realize that before it's too late. That belief mentioned in scripture includes submitting to the teaching of Christ, not just believing he is one's personal Savior. That teaching is found in the church Christ founded. Whoever hears those he sent hears Christ. Whoever rejects them, rejects Christ.
Certainly we may have different understandings, after all each and every individual has had God meet him or her in a different imperfect state, but this should never be a justification for division of the body.
If those different understandings were about things God did not reveal (like some of the issues between Calvinists and Armenians which are similar to Molonists and Thomists on the Catholic side) then I would agree it should never be a justification for division of the body. However, different teachings that contradict each other and what Christ taught, especially regarding matters of salvation, should never be tolerated.
What Paul wrote is this: “For in Christ Jesus....The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.”
Very true and an excellent verse thought it's important to know the faith is what Christ taught and that love involves obeying the commandments and is necessary for salvation.
