Jump to content

SovereignGraceSingles

Welcome to SovereignGraceSingles.com. Where Reformed Faith and Romance Come Together! We are the only Christian dating website for Christian Singles in the Reformed Faith worldwide. Our focus is to bring together Christian singles of all ages. Reformed single Christian men and women who wish to meet other Reformed Christian singles for spiritually, like-minded, loving relationships.
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” - Genesis 2:18
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

Meet Like Minded Believers Can two walk together except they be agreed? - Amos 3:3
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Join us now

SovereignGraceSingles

SGS offers a "fenced" community: both for private single members and also a public Protestant forums open to Bible-believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene-derived Christian Church.
Join us now
fivepointer

Please help convince me to not convert to Catholicism...

Recommended Posts

Deidre
1 hour ago, GodsGrace said:

You bring up an interesting point, D.

About the Pope being the only one who could interpret scripture.  

This isn't true...what they say is that the Magesterium exegetes scripture.

If that church is not sure about something....they just state that and do not come up with strange views.

 

OTOH, look at protestantism.  So many denominations...so many different views.

At the reformation Luther, Calvin, were the governing force.  Then as time went on things changed again and now we have so many different teachings and we all say we learn from the Holy Spirit.....makes me wonder how many Holy Spirits there are!

 

I'd say that the JWs are not Christian because they don't believe in Jesus like we do...they believe He's a created being.  Don't know enough about the Mormons, so no comment.  But catholics believe in Jesus just like you and I do.  They have some odd teachings,  but I think every church does.  There's a church pretty close to me that believes a person could be saved AFTER death.....that they get a last chance.

 

I guess I just don't feel any hatred and don't understand hatred for a denomination....I do believe we should try to change the JWs for example.  I always speak to them when they come to my door.  They seem happy though, so....we can only try.

I never said ''hate.'' Please don't put words in my mouth. I just suggest that you understand what you're defending. Why defend a false faith? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Deidre

I think it goes beyond Protestant vs Catholic. It's really Jesus vs Catholicism, to be honest. Most Catholics don't see the forest through the trees, until they leave the RCC. Like I did, and then you realize how blinded you were by an organization that really is an obstacle to one's relationship with Jesus, not a helper. Catholicism is about following a religion, not following Jesus. Of course, the RCC won't illustrate their mission statement in such terms, but when you actually follow Catholicism for a few years at least, you'll develop a twisted view of who God is, as though He is this faraway entity that you can't possibly ever know without the aid of the Papacy and priests to aid your journey. Right. This is how they got away with hurting kids for so many decades - the brainwashing of the congregants causes blind obedience out of fear. Fear that if one doesn't pledge blind obedience to the Church (not Jesus), you will risk your salvation. 

 

I don't know who posted it on here, but someone posted I believe that the churches are practically empty in the RCC in Europe? That makes me happy. Guess their facade is finally wearing thin. The Truth will eventually show, and people are not accepting that the RCC is this holier than thou moral compass that it has pretended to be all these centuries. God will not be mocked, and the RCC has been making a mockery of Christianity for a long time. 

 

Edit to add, I just googled an article about the emptying of churches in Europe, and the article discusses how this should ''serve as a warning for America.'' Oh yessss, we are shaking over here, that the RCC's churches are shutting down in Europe! 😂 

 

I pray for all those who are leaving the RCC, that they don't leave Jesus. That they come to know Him, and have a beautiful relationship with Him, and realize that the RCC is not the way, the truth, and the life, but Jesus is. He is all we need.

Edited by Deidre
  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Innerfire89
5 hours ago, GodsGrace said:

don't understand HOW THEY PERVERT the gospel.

I do think that they add to it by making some things a mortal sin...it's like a revolving door:  one is saved, unsaved, saved, unsaved.   

I mean, from reading scripture, I just don't get this idea.

John says we sin,   1 John:8.9     This is normal, one-time sinning.

He says that if we live a LIFE OF SIN,   1 John 3:9   THAT can put our soul in danger.  This is what I agree with.

Adding to it is perverting it, you can not change the Gospel in any way whatsoever.

 

1 John 3:9 says Christians don't practice sin, the reason we can't continue in sin is because it's what we do, we are dead to sin.

5 hours ago, GodsGrace said:

We have OSAS  which is NOT biblical.  It says that no matter what we do after salvation we can never become lost again.

 

Then we have Eternally Secure...I believe this.   We are eternally secure but as long as we remain IN CHRIST.

 

Then Perseverance of the Saints...which you might want to explain to me.

I BELIEVE it states that God will see us to the end?  Or is it that we will be saved for as long as we obey God's commandments and follow Jesus?  (which I do believe this BTW,,,,obeying and following).

I agree about OSAS and eternal security.

 

God seeing us through to the end sums up Persverance of the Saints pretty good. Bearing fruit and faith are the outcome of being saved and being indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

 

Westminster book of Confessions 

Chapter XVII. Of the Perseverance of the Saints

I. They, whom God hath accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved, (Phl 1:6; 2Pe 1:10; Jhn 10:28-29; 1Jo 3:9; 1Pe 5:9).

II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father, (2Ti 2:18-19; Jer 31:3); upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ, (Hbr 10:10, 14; Hbr 13:20-21; Hbr 9:12-15; Rom 8:33-39; Jhn 17:11, 24; Luk 22:32; Hbr 7:25); the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them, (Jhn 14:16-17; 1Jo 2:27; 1Jo 3:9); and the nature of the covenant of grace: from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof, (Jer 32:40; Jhn 10:28; 2Th 3:3; 1Jo 2:19).

III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins, (Mat 26:70, 72, 74); and, for a time, continue therein, (Psa 51:14): whereby they incur Gods, displeasure, (Isa 64:5, 7, 9; 2Sa 11:27); and grieve His Holy Spirit, (Eph 4:30); come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, (Psa 51:8, 10, 12; Rev 2:4; Sgs 5:2-4, 6); have their hearts hardened, (Isa 63:17; Mar 6:52; Mar 16:14); and their consciences wounded, (Psa 32:3-4; Ps 51:8); hurt and scandalize others, (2Sa 12:14); and bring temporal judgments upon themselves, (Psa 89:31-32; 1Co 11:32).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Innerfire89

 

5 hours ago, GodsGrace said:



5.  The Roman Catholic Church is necessary for salvation

The CC teaches that there is salvation outside of the CC but that the entire truth is not held by other churches.   CCC 1271

 

6.  Sacred Tradition equal to scripture

I do believe there is change regarding this...but I can't offer any solid proof, so I should let it go.  

 

7. Forgiveness of sins, salvation, is by faith and works

If you believe that obeying the 10 commandments is a work, then the above is true.

 

8.  Full benefit of Salvation is only through the Roman Catholic Church

Same as no. 5...

 

I do agree with everything else on the list.

We can skip 5,6,8.

#7 works, deeds, and fruit of any kind do not save or justify, we are justifed by the works of Christ merited to us.

 

6 hours ago, GodsGrace said:

 

If you speak to any priest he'll tell you that Jesus is NOT being re-sacrificed.

Jesus' one-time sacrifice is being offered to God - I do believe this is different, but it's a fine line.

It's a resacrifice of Christ one time sacrifice, makes no sense but that's what it is.

Catholic confession 

1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit: 

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
5 hours ago, Deidre said:

I never said ''hate.'' Please don't put words in my mouth. I just suggest that you understand what you're defending. Why defend a false faith? 

 

 

I didn't attribute "hate" to you.

I was saying it.

I do notice a lot of hate for the catholic church.

This doesn't mean I said YOU stated this....

it's my own statement.

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
1 hour ago, Innerfire89 said:

Adding to it is perverting it, you can not change the Gospel in any way whatsoever.

 

Hi IF,

Yes,  I think you're right.

If I add a condition to Jesus' words, then that would be perverting His words.

If He speaks only of heaven and hell, and a person adds purgatory to His words...His teaching is being changed.

1 hour ago, Innerfire89 said:

 

1 John 3:9 says Christians don't practice sin, the reason we can't continue in sin is because it's what we do, we are dead to sin.

I agree about OSAS and eternal security.

 

I agree re 1 John 3:9.  I think.

We do not practice sin in the sense that we do not live in sin.  I like your wording "we cannot CONTINUE in sin".

 

Then you add that we are dead to sin...I hope this doesn't mean that we never even sin ??  John does say that we sin...I do see a difference between individual sins that can be confessed and forgiven when they happen....and Living In Sin which is a lifestyle that will not be acceptable to God.

1 hour ago, Innerfire89 said:

 

God seeing us through to the end sums up Persverance of the Saints pretty good. Bearing fruit and faith are the outcome of being saved and being indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

 

Agreed.

1 hour ago, Innerfire89 said:

 

Westminster book of Confessions 

Chapter XVII. Of the Perseverance of the Saints

I. They, whom God hath accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved, (Phl 1:6; 2Pe 1:10Jhn 10:28-291Jo 3:91Pe 5:9).

II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father, (2Ti 2:18-19Jer 31:3); upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ, (Hbr 10:10, 14; Hbr 13:20-21; Hbr 9:12-15; Rom 8:33-39Jhn 17:1124Luk 22:32; Hbr 7:25); the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them, (Jhn 14:16-171Jo 2:271Jo 3:9); and the nature of the covenant of grace: from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof, (Jer 32:40Jhn 10:282Th 3:31Jo 2:19).

III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins, (Mat 26:707274); and, for a time, continue therein, (Psa 51:14😞 whereby they incur Gods, displeasure, (Isa 64:5792Sa 11:27); and grieve His Holy Spirit, (Eph 4:30); come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, (Psa 51:81012Rev 2:4; Sgs 5:2-4, 6); have their hearts hardened, (Isa 63:17Mar 6:52Mar 16:14); and their consciences wounded, (Psa 32:3-4Ps 51:8); hurt and scandalize others, (2Sa 12:14); and bring temporal judgments upon themselves, (Psa 89:31-321Co 11:32).

 

 

The above has me baffled, TTYTT.

 

I.  This sounds like those that say if a person was REALLY saved, they'd never have fallen away.  I can't agree with this due to verses such as 2 Peter 2:20-22

IOW, it sounds like it's stating that if I'm REALLY saved,  there is no chance of ever falling away....2 Peter speaks directly to this and states the opposit...

 

II.  How could my free will not have a part in my salvation, or loss thereof?

I cannot freely decide to abandon God for whatever reason?  Maybe I'm mad at God...maybe I want to return to a life of sin,,,as in I .

 

III.  I do agree with this but it seems to go against II...

And, what ARE the temporal punishments?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Deidre
30 minutes ago, GodsGrace said:

I didn't attribute "hate" to you.

I was saying it.

I do notice a lot of hate for the catholic church.

This doesn't mean I said YOU stated this....

it's my own statement.

Okay, thank you for clarifying. I think there is hatred by many, because of how ''she'' holds ''herself'' out to be a moral compass, but ''she'' is anything but. What I'll admit irks me, is when I see a mainstream news network air the Pope giving his opinion on this or that. Who cares? Why is this guy held up to be an authority on how we live our lives? And this is the same Pope who applauded the recent pedophile who was a cardinal, for the good work he had done in his role (Cardinal Pell), and is going to jail. lol I have no idea why anyone would look to the RCC hierarchy at this point, after all that has happened, as an authority on anything having to do with morality. For example, they are deeply immersed in the ''right to life'' anti-abortion position, yet they turned a blind eye for decades as to the abuse all the children had suffered by their clergy...world-wide? Hypocritical to say the least. No one needs to hate the RCC...they have created their own house of cards.

 

The RCC doesn't seem repentant, to be honest. We all are sinners, yes. But, over the past few years, I've watched how the hierarchy tries to draw attention away from the situation. Occasionally, praying for the victims of the abuses, etc. But, there doesn't seem to be a sense of true sorrowful repentance, for how long those scandals went on. It almost looks like they're just sorry that they were caught and can't hide behind their power, anymore. I think that is why they attract a lot of disdain, as well. 

Edited by Deidre

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
56 minutes ago, Innerfire89 said:

 

We can skip 5,6,8.

#7 works, deeds, and fruit of any kind do not save or justify, we are justifed by the works of Christ merited to us.

 

It's a resacrifice of Christ one time sacrifice, makes no sense but that's what it is.

Catholic confession 

1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit: 

I agree about justification...

 

Re Jesus' sacrifice....best to let it go.

The SAME sacrifice is re-offered...not a NEW sacrifice.

Jesus and God have no time...so it's as if we were standing at Jesus' feet at the cross right now....re-present, as you said. 

 

 

Edited by GodsGrace

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
1 minute ago, Deidre said:

Okay, thank you for clarifying. I think there is hatred by many, because of how ''she'' holds ''herself'' out to be a moral compass, but ''she'' is anything but. What I'll admit irks me, is when I see a mainstream news network air the Pope giving his opinion on this or that. Who cares? Why is this guy held up to be an authority on how we live our lives? And this is the same Pope who applauded the recent pedophile who was a cardinal in Australia, and is going to jail. lol I have no idea why anyone would look to the RCC hierarchy at this point, after all that has happened, as an authority on anything having to do with morality. 

Hi D,

I have to agree with you.

Unfortunately, I do see some kind of ecumenical movement with the pope at its head.  I believe he signed some kind of pact with a couple of protestant denominations.  It reminds me of this one-world religion some are working for.

I'm the one who spoke about the churches in Europe becoming empty.  I live in Italy and I'm seeing this by personal experience. In France it's even worse.

 

You said that you hope these people are leaving the church but not Jesus.

The problem is that there are not many protestant churches in many countries here; especially small places.  Maybe we'll finally get some?  That would be nice.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Deidre
1 minute ago, GodsGrace said:

Hi D,

I have to agree with you.

Unfortunately, I do see some kind of ecumenical movement with the pope at its head.  I believe he signed some kind of pact with a couple of protestant denominations.  It reminds me of this one-world religion some are working for.

I'm the one who spoke about the churches in Europe becoming empty.  I live in Italy and I'm seeing this by personal experience. In France it's even worse.

 

You said that you hope these people are leaving the church but not Jesus.

The problem is that there are not many protestant churches in many countries here; especially small places.  Maybe we'll finally get some?  That would be nice.

 

 

It is sad, I can honestly see where many Catholics might feel a sense of betrayal and feel lost because they don't know where to turn. But, they should turn to the Bible. That is all we really need, the Bible. We don't need a hierarchy or priests...or pastors, even. I think that we should be wise to discern any church before joining it. But, I don't look to a pastor to give me hope. I think that any pastor of a church should be well versed in the Bible, but most importantly, should not be interested in power and prestige. Humility and a true love for the Bible is what I seek now, in a church pastor. But, in truth, no church building or ''organization'' is needed. 

 

This particular Pope...part of me thinks that he doesn't want to be a Catholic, anymore lol He seems interested in bending what Catholicism actually is, in order to gain more followers. Catholicism is what it is, and if he starts changing rules, and bringing forth his own ideas...that isn't Catholicism. He can't have it both ways. That's why people leave Catholicism, because it's a false religion. If the Pope tinkers with it to make it more appealing, that shows me even more, that it's a false faith. lol 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Deidre

Regarding the idea that this Pope is possibly trying to create ''one world religion.'' That too shows he has no idea who Jesus is. It's downright scary to me, that this guy is leading a religious organization that is supposed to have Jesus at its helm. He is supposed to be the ''vicar of Christ'' on earth, but if he believes that everyone can just believe whatever they wish, and there is no one path to salvation, he is no different than the false prophets that Jesus warned us about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Innerfire89
1 hour ago, GodsGrace said:

Then you add that we are dead to sin...I hope this doesn't mean that we never even sin ??  John does say that we sin...I do see a difference between individual sins that can be confessed and forgiven when they happen....and Living In Sin which is a lifestyle that will not be acceptable to God

I don't mean perfectionism, dead to sin as in dead to the sin nature, no longer living to sin.

 

1 hour ago, GodsGrace said:

 

I.  This sounds like those that say if a person was REALLY saved, they'd never have fallen away.  I can't agree with this due to verses such as 2 Peter 2:20-22

IOW, it sounds like it's stating that if I'm REALLY saved,  there is no chance of ever falling away....2 Peter speaks directly to this and states the opposit...

 

II.  How could my free will not have a part in my salvation, or loss thereof?

I cannot freely decide to abandon God for whatever reason?  Maybe I'm mad at God...maybe I want to return to a life of sin,,,as in I .

 

III.  I do agree with this but it seems to go against II...

And, what ARE the temporal punishments?

 

The "if" in 2 Peter 2:20 is very important to take note of.

If they were saved it would be like that, but they are just the same dogs returning to thier vomit.

2 Peter 2:20

20For IF, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22What the true proverb says has happened to them: “The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing herself, returns to wallow in the mire.”

 

And the verse right before that describes them as clouds with out water, water being The Holy Spirit.

 

It's not that your will has no part at all, but it's not by your will that you persevere. It is the will of God that you persevere and He sees it through. 

 

Temporal punishments can be a lot of things, it could be church discipline, illness like those who were taking the Lord's supper in an unworthy, manner, I would even go far enough to say death like with Ananias and Saphera.

Paragraph 3 kinda anwsers the question already.

Share this post


Link to post
Matthew A.Duvall
On ‎3‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 8:22 AM, Deidre said:

I don't see it as any different than speaking out against any other false faith. Catholicism is a false faith. ''You'll know them by their fruits,'' Jesus said. Of course, we can find good Catholics anywhere, but that's not what He meant. The faith itself is in error. Teaching that the Pope is the only one who can infallibly interpret Scripture, is just one example of rotten fruit that faith produces. I liken it to any other false faith. 

Not only that but it is also taught that if the pope disagrees with anything Jesus Christ says  he has the power to over rule Him.   Amazing eh ! A bald headed reprobate that can't speak the language of his own office over ruling the creator of Heaven and Earth . It's called blasphemy. And one that really makes my angry and sick is the teaching that Mary was the co-Redeemer with Jesus .In other words there is no salvation aside from Mary and the Pope !

Edited by Matthew A.Duvall
spelling
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Faber
1 hour ago, Matthew Duvall said:

And one that really makes my angry and sick is the teaching that Mary was the co-Redeemer with Jesus .In other words there is no salvation aside from Mary and the Pope !

 Excellent point.

 

 One can not separate their belief about Mary (and I suppose any other official RC dogma) with salvation. If what the RCC teaches about her is denied then they deny you salvation.

 

And about purgatory, remember this infamous line: When the coin in the coffer rings, the soul in purgatory springs. (John Tetzel)

 This whole system is for hucksters and charlatans.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Deidre
3 hours ago, Matthew Duvall said:

Not only that but it is also taught that if the pope disagrees with anything Jesus Christ says  he has the power to over rule Him.   Amazing eh ! A bald headed reprobate that can't speak the language of his own office over ruling the creator of Heaven and Earth . It's called blasphemy. And one that really makes my angry and sick is the teaching that Mary was the co-Redeemer with Jesus .In other words there is no salvation aside from Mary and the Pope !

I remember reading that the RCC changed the wording of the Lord's prayer. lol Hmm, Jesus? Your words aren't really what you should have said...let's try this...😂

 

He took issue with ''lead us not into temptation...'' lol You just can't make this stuff up. 

 

WWW1.CBN.COM

The Vatican — under the direction of Pope Francis — will soon change the verbiage in the Lord’s Prayer to clarify God does not, in fact, tempt people.

 

Edited by Deidre

Share this post


Link to post
Matthew A.Duvall
On ‎4‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 1:16 AM, William said:

 

Hi James,

 

Curious as to which Presbyterian church you belong? For example, the OPC, PCA, or PCUSA?

 

God bless,

William

OPC ,,,I don't think that I have ever heard of that one .  Could that be Orthodox by chance ?   M

Share this post


Link to post
Guest William
2 hours ago, Matthew Duvall said:

OPC ,,,I don't think that I have ever heard of that one .  Could that be Orthodox by chance ?   M

Yes, Orthodox which means true and correct in contrast to liberalism. The OPC is considered one of the most conservative and Reformed Presbyterian denominations. We split from the PCUSA back in the 1940s when our reformers were being disciplined for upholding the creeds and confessions when liberalism first crept in. Generally what sets us apart from the PCA is our regulative principle of worship. 

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
On 3/26/2019 at 11:40 PM, Innerfire89 said:

I don't mean perfectionism, dead to sin as in dead to the sin nature, no longer living to sin.

 

Hi IF,

Sorry for delay.

 

Do you believe the sin nature is dead after salvation?

Or do you believe it is under submission?

On 3/26/2019 at 11:40 PM, Innerfire89 said:

 

The "if" in 2 Peter 2:20 is very important to take note of.

If they were saved it would be like that, but they are just the same dogs returning to thier vomit.

2 Peter 2:20

20For IF, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. 22What the true proverb says has happened to them: “The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing herself, returns to wallow in the mire.”

We're not going to agree on the above word IF.

They (the false teachers) have escaped the defilements of the world through the KNOWLEDGE of our Lord,  this would mean that they are saved.

 

IF, they are AGAIN entangled in them (the defilements)...the AGAIN clearly shows that they had left the world and then went back to it.  They were:

 

In the world       unsaved

Left it                 saved

Went back to it   unsaved

 

verse 21 clearly states that they knew the way of righteousness and that they turned their back on the holy commandment. 

 

verse 22 states that they RETURNED to their vomit....

 

If they returned to it,,,,means that they had been somewhere else for a time...

that would be salvation and they returned to being lost.

On 3/26/2019 at 11:40 PM, Innerfire89 said:

 

And the verse right before that describes them as clouds with out water, water being The Holy Spirit.

 

This doesn't seem important to me, or does it change the next verses.

On 3/26/2019 at 11:40 PM, Innerfire89 said:

 

It's not that your will has no part at all, but it's not by your will that you persevere. It is the will of God that you persevere and He sees it through. 

 

Sounds like you want your cake and eat it too !

What part would my will have in my salvation then?

(If it's God that sees it through)

 

 

On 3/26/2019 at 11:40 PM, Innerfire89 said:

 

Temporal punishments can be a lot of things, it could be church discipline, illness like those who were taking the Lord's supper in an unworthy, manner, I would even go far enough to say death like with Ananias and Saphera.

Paragraph 3 kinda anwsers the question already.

I won't comment on the above.

I believe my understanding will be different from yours.

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
On 3/26/2019 at 4:23 PM, William said:

Consider the Catholic view of Justification:

 

II. THE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE ON JUSTIFICATION.—We have an authentic explanation of the Catholic doctrine in the famous “Decretum de justification” of the Sixth Session (January 13, 1547) of the Council of Trent, which in sixteen chapters (cf. Denzinger-Bannwart, “Enchir.”, nn. 793-810) and thirty-three canons (I. c., 811-43) gives in the clearest manner all necessary information about the process, causes, effects, and qualities of justification.

 

(I) The Process of Justification (Processus justificationis).—Since justification as an application of the Redemption to the individual presupposes the fall of the entire human race, the Council of Trent quite logically begins with the fundamental statement that original sin has weakened and deflected, but not entirely destroyed or extinguished the freedom of the human will (Trent, sess. VI, cap. is “Liberum arbitrium minime extinctum, viribus licet attenuatum et inclinatum”). Nevertheless, as the children of Adam were really corrupted by original sin, they could not of themselves arise from their fall nor shake off the bonds of sin, death, and Satan. Neither the natural faculties left in man, nor the observance of the Jewish Law could achieve this.

 

We can't use the Council of Trent for the doctrine of Justification.

It has been changed....I won't read everything because whatever it says will be incorrect (unless it matches with the current belief).

 

Here is the link....paragraph 15 is significant.

 

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

On 3/26/2019 at 4:23 PM, William said:

 

 

 

Since God alone was able to free us from this great misery, He sent in His infinite love His only begotten Son Jesus Christ, Who by His bitter passion and death on the cross redeemed fallen man and thus became the Mediator between God and man. But, if the grace of Redemption merited by Christ is to be appropriated by the individual, he must be “regenerated in God”, that is he must be justified. What then is meant by justification? Justification denotes that change or transformation in the soul by which man is transferred from the state of original sin, in which as a child of Adam he was born, to that of grace and Divine sonship through Jesus Christ, the second Adam, our Redeemer (I. c., cap. iv: “Justificatio impii… translatio ab eo statu, in quo homo nascitur filius primi Adae, in statum gratiae et adoptionis filiorum Dei per secundum Adam, Jesum Christum, Salvatorem nostrum”). In the New Law this justification cannot, according to Christ’s precept, be effected except at the fountain of regeneration, that is, by the baptism of water. While in Baptism infants are forthwith cleansed of the stain of original sin without any preparation on their part, the adult must pass through a moral preparation, which consists essentially in turning from sin and towards God. This entire process receives its first impulse from the supernatural grace of vocation (absolutely independent of man’s merits), and requires an intrinsic union of the Divine and human action, of grace and moral freedom of election, in such a manner, however, that the will can resist, and with full liberty reject the influence of grace (Trent, 1. c., can. iv: “If any one should say that free will, moved and set in action by God, cannot cooperate by assenting to God’s call, nor dissent if it wish… let him be anathema”).

 

The CC DOES believe in free will.

And I don't agree with Augustine's concept of Original Sin, which did NOT exist before him.

On 3/26/2019 at 4:23 PM, William said:

 

By this decree the Council not only condemned the Protestant view that the will in the reception of grace remains merely passive, but also forestalled the Jansenistic heresy regarding the impossibility of resisting actual grace. (See Cornelius Jansen.) With what little right heretics in defense of their doctrine appeal to St. Augustine, may be seen from the following brief extract from his writings: “He who made you without your doing does not without your action justify you. Without your knowing He made you, with your willing He justifies you; but it is He who justifies, that the justice be not your own” (Serm. clxix, c. xi, n. 13). Regarding St. Augustine’s doctrine cf. J. Mausbach, “Die Ethik des hl. Augustinus”, II, Freiburg, 1909, pp. 208-58.

 

This sounds right....we are justified by God because we wish to be so.

On 3/26/2019 at 4:23 PM, William said:

 

We now come to the different stages in the process of justification. The Council of Trent assigns the first and most important place to faith, which is styled “the beginning, foundation and root of all justification” (Trent, 1. c., cap. viii). Cardinal Pallavicini (Hist. Conc. Trid., VIIL, iv, 18) tells us that all the bishops present at the council fully realized how important it was to explain St. Paul’s saying that man is justified through faith.

 

Correct...Ephesians 2:8-9

Justification is purely a work of God.

Man cannot earn justification.

On 3/26/2019 at 4:23 PM, William said:

 

 

 

Comparing Bible and Tradition they could not experience any serious difficulty in showing that fiduciary faith was an absolutely new invention and that the faith of justification was identical with a firm belief in the truths and promises of Divine revelation (I. c., cap. vi: “credentes vera esse, quae divinitus revelata et promissa sunt”). As its first effect this supernatural faith produces in the soul a fear of God’s avenging justice, and then, through the consideration of God’s mercy, it awakens the hope of forgiveness for Christ’s sake, which is soon followed by the first beginnings of charity (I. c.: “illumque [Deum] tanquam omnis justifiae fontem diligere incipiunt”).

 

 

Agreed.  I didn't check out Catholic Answers.

I'm not sure I'd agree with all they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest William
3 hours ago, GodsGrace said:

 

We can't use the Council of Trent for the doctrine of Justification.

It has been changed....I won't read everything because whatever it says will be incorrect (unless it matches with the current belief).

 

Here is the link....paragraph 15 is significant.

 

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

 

The CC DOES believe in free will.

And I don't agree with Augustine's concept of Original Sin, which did NOT exist before him.

 

This sounds right....we are justified by God because we wish to be so.

 

Correct...Ephesians 2:8-9

Justification is purely a work of God.

Man cannot earn justification.

Agreed.  I didn't check out Catholic Answers.

I'm not sure I'd agree with all they say.

Catholicism defines justification from a synergistic perspective where Christ's works are infused rather than imputed. The Catholic definition is wrong and is why I posted the above, because Catholic councils which expose error in themselves contradict does not mean they still do not contradict scripture. This is why I'm persistent about exposing the Catholic view of justification. When a Catholic uses justification they mean something unscriptural. 

 

Regarding Augustine's view of original sin it exists from the apostolic doctrine. It wasn't called into question until the heretic Pelagius, the catholic church aligned with the apostles and the continuing works of Augustine. The Catholic church broke from catholic theology when they abandoned sola scriptura, unless the Catholics ever reform back to the simple principles which were reestablished from the reformation they'll always be apostate. In other words there is no compromise with regard to the 5 solas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest William

When Martin Luther stood trial before the Catholics he refused to yield to councils which contradict, Luther was not dismissing all councils but those which could not show the theolgy in question approved by scripture. Nothing has changed in the Catholic church.

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
6 minutes ago, William said:

Catholicism defines justification from a synergistic perspective where Christ's works are infused rather than imputed. The Catholic definition is wrong and is why I posted the above, because Catholic councils which expose error in themselves contradict does not mean they still do not contradict scripture. This is why I'm persistent about exposing the Catholic view of justification. When a Catholic uses justification they mean something unscriptural. 

 

How could you say the above after the link I posted??

Catholics understand Justification exactly the same way Protestants do.

There's no difference.  We are justified by God alone with no works from us.

 

If you want to discuss sanctification or progressive justification, then it's a different story...but you cannot say that catholics do not believe in justification by God's work alone.  I don't know where you're getting your information from...

The Council of Trent is outdated....

I posted a link of the churche's position as of the late 90s.

6 minutes ago, William said:

 

Regarding Augustine's view of original sin it exists from the apostolic doctrine. It wasn't called into question until the heretic Pelagius, the catholic church aligned with the apostles and the continuing works of Augustine. The Catholic church broke from catholic theology when they abandoned sola scriptura, unless the Catholics ever reform back to the simple principles which were reestablished from the reformation they'll always be apostate. In other words there is no compromise with regard to the 5 solas. 

The Apostolic period did NOT agree with Augustine's view of original sin.

They agreed that man was in a fallen state due to original sin,,,,but not until Augustine and the acceptance of his view on O.S. did infant baptism become all-important due to his belief that Adam's sin was imputed to us individually.

 

Also,  since I'm not catholic I should really stop defending them!

Share this post


Link to post
Guest William
27 minutes ago, GodsGrace said:

Also,  since I'm not catholic I should really stop defending them!

No argument from me. And when I reestablish a computer and connection I'll address your post and the apostate Catholics. 

 

What Augustine established was federal headship. The natural man is under the federal headship of Adam as are believers under the federal headship of the second Adam. The second Adam's legal standing is imputed towards believers as the first Adam's unrighteousness was imputed to unbelievers. This is Scriptural and I'll be happy to dive more deeply in the theology from Romans when reestablished. 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest William
48 minutes ago, GodsGrace said:

 

How could you say the above after the link I posted??

Catholics understand Justification exactly the same way Protestants do.

There's no difference.  We are justified by God alone with no works from us.

 

If you want to discuss sanctification or progressive justification, then it's a different story...but you cannot say that catholics do not believe in justification by God's work alone.  I don't know where you're getting your information from...

The Council of Trent is outdated....

I posted a link of the churche's position as of the late 90s.

The Apostolic period did NOT agree with Augustine's view of original sin.

They agreed that man was in a fallen state due to original sin,,,,but not until Augustine and the acceptance of his view on O.S. did infant baptism become all-important due to his belief that Adam's sin was imputed to us individually.

 

Also,  since I'm not catholic I should really stop defending them!

Just want to leave on this note. The fact that you distinguish justification from progressive justification proves my point. Justification is not the same between Catholic and Protestant theology. 

 

Rome continues to deny that justification is based on Christ alone, received by faith alone, and given by grace alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
GodsGrace
3 hours ago, William said:

Just want to leave on this note. The fact that you distinguish justification from progressive justification proves my point. Justification is not the same between Catholic and Protestant theology. 

 

Rome continues to deny that justification is based on Christ alone, received by faith alone, and given by grace alone. 

No W,

It's due to terminology.

How do you explain justification?

It IS by Christ alone and faith alone,,,which is affirmed by the CC ....

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...
Articles - News