Fixing a hole where the rain gets in ...

[ozso]

It's been a while since I interacted with them, so I can't say. Arguing your religion is better than another religion, in certain contexts, could be considered proselytism.

The definition of proselytism according to the World Council of Churches. This definition is generally agreed by Catholics, as well:

By that definition a lot of CF threads are attempts at proselytism.

I know of one Protestant denomonation in particular on CF that does a lot of proselytising. Strongly implying that Christians who don't follow their doctrine of sabbatarianism and diet are going to hell for willful disobedience.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Being a christian gets nobody to heaven.

what do you mean by "christian" in that sentence?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I know of one Protestant denomonation in particular on CF that does a lot of proselytising. Strongly implying that Christians who don't follow their doctrine of sabbatarianism and diet are going to hell for willful disobedience.

Some Seventh Day Adventists are pushy about Saturday observance, and I guess that is because it is a distinguishing mark of their religion as well as being an important sign of the arrival of Armageddon in their eschatology, but most SDA folk are not so pushy about these things.

 

[Mark Quayle]

That proposition is in error.

What do you propose to counter it? I don't mean, why do you disagree, but what do you claim is the default? —Just to be clear...

 

[Mark Quayle]

In reality, confessionalism is the norm among Protestants, even if that confession is unspoken.

Perhaps. I don't know most Protestants. But is it the default? Is that of more authority than Scripture, to them? Or are the confessions understood to be drawn off of Scripture?

 

[Mark Quayle]

hmmmm -- as someone who is NOT Baptist -- that opens the door to a few questions... since you are comparing Baptist history to Catholic history --

1. Do the Baptists have any so-called infallible ecumenical councils calling for a LATERAN IV style "extermination of heretics" when it comes to Catholics??

2. Do the Baptists have anything like the "doctrine of discovery"??
3. Do the Baptists have a history of banning the Bible in the language of the people for entire nations?

I need to hear more about those Baptists I guess to see if your comparison above is accurate/complete

Huh? I don't think I mentioned Baptist history.

 

[FireDragon76]

Perhaps. I don't know most Protestants. But is it the default? Is that of more authority than Scripture, to them? Or are the confessions understood to be drawn off of Scripture?

All biblical interpretation takes place within an historical context or tradition. Even for Protestants.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

What do you propose to counter it? I don't mean, why do you disagree, but what do you claim is the default? —Just to be clear...

My reply was to a sub-thread in this conversation; it addresses your post which said "So, Catholicism is the default...? Everything else falls short?" and the statement your posts made later, "The default is Scripture. No denomination.". To which I replied that the proposition your post contains is in error. And what I propose as an answer to the error that your post proposed is that the scriptures and two thousand years of experience show that it is the Church that is the foundation of Christian teaching. The scriptures are part of the Church's patrimony and participate in the Church's answers on doctrine and practise but on Earth in this age it is the Church that is "pillar and ground of truth" for Christians, with Christ being the eternal Truth from which the Church derives all of its truths.

 

[d taylor]

what do you mean by "christian" in that sentence?

What do i mean, i mean what the word christian has always meant, one who follows Christ

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

What do i mean, i mean what the word christian has always meant, one who follows Christ

You think following Christ, with faith since he said that one must have faith to be his disciple, is not the way to salvation?

 

[d taylor]

You think following Christ, with faith since he said that one must have faith to be his disciple, is not the way to salvation?

No it is plainly stated to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life salvation and become a born again child of God is by belief in Jesus. That is to believe that Jesus is the resurrection and the life, the promised Messiah/the only begotten Son of God. Believing that is what gives a person Eternal Life.

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

Following Christ is great, but a person before they follow Jesus, they should fist believe in Jesus for Eternal Life.

To many are following Jesus thinking that is the way to Eternal Life.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

No it is plainly stated to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life salvation and become a born again child of God is by belief in Jesus.

Is that all? Just belief and nothing else? I ask you to consider this passage

1Tim 5:7 Give these instructions as well, so that they may be above reproach. 8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.​

 

[d taylor]

Is that all? Just belief and nothing else? I ask you to consider this passage

1Tim 5:7 Give these instructions as well, so that they may be above reproach. 8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.​

Do not really see the connection with 1st Timothy 5:7 , to people receiving God's free gift of Eternal Life.

All 1st Timothy 5:7 is addressing is bad conduct of believers, ones who are not looking after family members.

Paul is saying that believers who do not look after their family are worse than unbelievers. In the respect that even an unbeliever can take care of an aging or sick family member. And that believers being a member of Christ should have higher standards of love than unbelievers. If they do not, then they are worse than unbelievers in this area of their life.

 

[BobRyan]

Some Seventh Day Adventists are pushy about Saturday observance, and I guess that is because it is a distinguishing mark of their religion as well as being an important sign of the arrival of Armageddon in their eschatology, but most SDA folk are not so pushy about these things.

If you go to the "Sabbath and the Law" subforum here at CF you will find a lot more than just Seventh-day Adventists advocating for an "unedited" Ten Commandments. The idea that we should not delete or edit God's Ten Commandments is not an idea that is specific to Seventh-day Adventists.

But in general it is hard to find a single doctrine discussed in the General Theology section where one-or-more denominations favor it, and a number of other denominations do not favor it -- where nobody will defend it.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Do not really see the connection with 1st Timothy 5:7 , to people receiving God's free gift of Eternal Life.

All 1st Timothy 5:7 is addressing is bad conduct of believers, ones who are not looking after family members.

Paul is saying that believers who do not look after their family are worse than unbelievers. In the respect that even an unbeliever can take care of an aging or sick family member. And that believers being a member of Christ should have higher standards of love than unbelievers. If they do not, then they are worse than unbelievers in this area of their life.

Except that the verses says: 1Tim 5:7-8 7 Give these instructions as well, so that they may be above reproach. 8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. Which your post omits.

 

[d taylor]

Except that the verses says: 1Tim 5:7-8 7 Give these instructions as well, so that they may be above reproach. 8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. Which your post omits.

Denying the faith, that still has nothing to do with Eternal Life.
Denying the faith means that, that is how believers should operate their life living out Christ in their daily lives. If they do not, they deny the faith, that is they put it aside to pursue worldly pleasures or to live as they please. Basically living a selfish life, looking to do things that bring themselves temporarily pleasure.

Believers can and do deny the faith all the time, The Bible has many examples. David's pursuit of Bathsheba, Samson and his denying the faith episodes, Peter denying he knew Jesus, many belivers who would get drunk at the Lord's supper, etc...

What does it mean to “deny the faith”? — 1 Timothy 5:8 – Grace Evangelical Society

 

[Mark Quayle]

All biblical interpretation takes place within an historical context or tradition. Even for Protestants.

Of course, but the interpretation doesn't carry the plain authority. All Reformed, as far as I have met, consider the WCF to take a seat far behind Scripture itself. When they argue doctrine, they draw from Scripture, and, like me, reference the creeds for a better way to say what they believe.

 

[Mark Quayle]

My reply was to a sub-thread in this conversation; it addresses your post which said "So, Catholicism is the default...? Everything else falls short?" and the statement your posts made later, "The default is Scripture. No denomination.". To which I replied that the proposition your post contains is in error. And what I propose as an answer to the error that your post proposed is that the scriptures and two thousand years of experience show that it is the Church that is the foundation of Christian teaching. The scriptures are part of the Church's patrimony and participate in the Church's answers on doctrine and practise but on Earth in this age it is the Church that is "pillar and ground of truth" for Christians, with Christ being the eternal Truth from which the Church derives all of its truths.

In other words, to you, the church is of equal authority with Scripture, if not of more authority, it being "the pillar and ground of truth"?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

In other words, to you, the church is of equal authority with Scripture, if not of more authority, it being "the pillar and ground of truth"?

My reply doesn't need an "in other words" spin.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

it being "the pillar and ground of truth"?

Saint Paul is the one who said that the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth. If that disturbs you then your are disturbed by the teaching of Christ in the holy scriptures.

These things I write to thee, hoping that I shall come to thee shortly. But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. And evidently great is the mystery of godliness, which was manifested in the flesh, was justified in the spirit, appeared unto angels, hath been preached unto the Gentiles, is believed in the world, is taken up in glory.​

1 Timothy 3:14-16 DRB