Catholics, what do you do with 1 John 5? It contradicts RCC doctrine concerning the assurance of salvation. See for yourself.

[PJM]

“RCC doctrine says we can’t have assurance of salvation but the Bible says something quite different in 1 John. What do you do with this?”

here’s a wacky idea, why don’t we open our Bible and read what it actually say’s:doh2:

1 John: "**"2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3* For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. 4For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith. 5 Who is it that overcomes the world but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

6* This is he who came by water (BAPTISM)and blood,(EUCHARIST) Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. 7 And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth.** 8 There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree. 9* If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son. 10* He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne to his Son. 11 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son of God has not life.

And for the record we DO NOT have assurance of SALVATION, what we DO HAVE is assurence of Redemption. They don’t mean the same thing! Which is precisely why we need Baptism and the Eucharist to work out our Salvation in full accord to God’s plan!

Love and prayers Brother!

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

part 3 of 3

Cyprian of Carthage

“[T]he Church is one, and as she is one, cannot be both within and without. For if she is with Novatian, she was not with [Pope] Cornelius. But if she was with Cornelius, who succeeded the bishop Fabian by lawful ordination, and whom, beside the honor of the priesthood the Lord glorified also with martyrdom, Novatian is not in the Church; nor can he be reckoned as a bishop, who, succeeding to no one, and despising the evangelical and apostolic tradition, sprang from himself. For he who has not been ordained in the Church can neither have nor hold to the Church in any way” (Letters 75:3 [A.D. 253]).

Athanasius

“Again we write, again keeping to the apostolic traditions, we remind each other when we come together for prayer; and keeping the feast in common, with one mouth we truly give thanks to the Lord. Thus giving thanks unto him, and being followers of the saints, ‘we shall make our praise in the Lord all the day,’ as the psalmist says. So, when we rightly keep the feast, we shall be counted worthy of that joy which is in heaven” (Festal Letters 2:7 [A.D. 330]).

“But you are blessed, who by faith are in the Church, dwell upon the foundations of the faith, and have full satisfaction, even the highest degree of faith which remains among you unshaken. For it has come down to you from apostolic tradition, and frequently accursed envy has wished to unsettle it, but has not been able” (ibid., 29).

Basil the Great

“Of the dogmas and messages preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety, both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the gospel in its vitals; or rather, we would reduce [Christian] message to a mere term” (The Holy Spirit 27:66 [A.D. 375]).

Continued at

catholic.com/library/Apostolic_Tradition.asp

Boy what a history lesson I think that was great and you went way back in time AD120 I’m going to look up that Papias I never herd of him Thank You! What about Hippolytus? He knew about revelations. Nancy Peace:thumbsup:

 

[graceandglory]

"I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error
Why would you believe so strongly that the book compiled by the Catholic Church is free from error, when you believe the Catholic Church is so filled with error? The Catholic Church is older that the words on the page. I believe also in the inerrancy of Scripture. But many other books were written, and it is the Catholic Church that selected which of those books written would make the canon of Scripture.

Just because you might think a verse seems contradictory, doesn’t make it so. 1 John 5 might seem on the surface to contradict other scriptures but that doesn’t make it so. Things aren’t always as they appear to the naked eye. You need to read scripture through the eyes of the Church that gave it to you, and then you will get the whole picture.

I trust that the Bible is the inspired Word of God because the Catholic Church declared it to be. How do you know that you have the right Scriptures? What do you base it on?

 

[graceandglory]

And for the record we DO NOT have assurance of SALVATION, what we DO HAVE is assurance of Redemption. They don’t mean the same thing! Which is precisely why we need Baptism and the Eucharist to work out our Salvation in full accord to God’s plan!

Love and prayers Brother!

Pope Benedict explained “Assurance of Salvation” better than anyone, I think, in his most recent letter, titled: **“In hope are we saved.” **
“Spe Salvi”

“SPE SALVI facti sumus”—**in hope we were saved, **says Saint Paul to the Romans, and likewise to us (Rom 8:24). According to the Christian faith, “redemption”—salvation—is not simply a given. …
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20071130_spe-salvi_en.html

Read it in entirety here. It’s not any longer than any other epistle in the NT.
(Interesting…our Holy Father still writes letters like they did in the New Testament!)

---

For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God. *** Ephesians 2:8

It is really hard to explain Salvation in a 30 second sound bite, like in a tract on a windshield. Pope Benedict has done well.

 

[graceandglory]

The only difference between the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bible is that the Protestant Bible preserves the Jewish canon of the Old Testament as it was laid down since before the birth of Jesus while the Catholic Bible includes all the intertestamental books except for three.
.

And you believe this? Why? Who told you so?

Why don’t we historyfor the records of those who compiled the Christian Scriptures? (Remember, we’re Christian, not Jewish.)

Oh, that would be the councils of the Catholic Church.
Here is a very good and scholarly article that explains the truth of the canonicity of Scripture.

envoymagazine.com/backissues/1.2/marapril_story2.html

 

[1holycatholic]

“I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error…as I have said already, it is to the canonical Scriptures alone that I am bound to yield such implicit subjection as to follow their teaching, without admitting the slightest suspicion that in them any mistake or any statement intended to mislead could find a place.”

• Augustine, in a letter to St. Jerome. 1100 years prior to the Reformation.

Augustine honors the canon of Scripture - all 73 books.

Athanasius, Contra Gentes, 318.

Why stop there?
2. Still, as you nevertheless desire to hear about it, Macarius , come let us as we may be able set forth a few points of the faith of Christ: able though you are to find it out from the divine oracles, but yet generously desiring to hear from others as well. 3. For although the sacred and inspired Scriptures are sufficient to declare the truth—while there are other works of our blessed teachers compiled for this purpose, if he meet with which a man will gain some knowledge of the interpretation of the Scriptures, and be able to learn what he wishes to know—still, as we have not at present in our hands the compositions of our teachers, we must communicate in writing to you what we learned from them—the faith, namely, of Christ the Saviour; lest any should hold cheap the doctrine taught among us, or think faith. in Christ unreasonable. For this is what the Gentiles traduce and scoff at, and laugh loudly at us, insisting on the one fact of the Cross of Christ; and it is just here that one must pity their want of sense, because when they traduce the Cross of Christ they do not see that its power has filled all the world, and that by it the effects of the knowledge of God are made manifest to all.
…

Cyril of Jerusalem, mid 4th century.

St. Cyril writes in Catechetical Lecture 23:
…
7. Then having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual Hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth His Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying before Him; that He may make the Bread the Body of Christ, and the Wine the Blood of Christ ; for whatsoever the Holy Ghost has touched, is surely sanctified and changed.

1. Then, after the spiritual sacrifice, the bloodless service, is completed, over that sacrifice of propitiation we entreat God for the common peace of the Churches, for the welfare of the world ; for kings; for soldiers and allies; for the sick; for the afflicted; and, in a word, for all who stand in need of succour we all pray and offer this sacrifice.
2. Then we commemorate also those who have fallen asleep before us, first Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Martyrs, that at their prayers and intercessions God would receive our petition . Then on behalf also of the Holy Fathers and Bishops who have fallen asleep before us, and in a word of all who in past years have fallen asleep among us, believing that it will be a very great benefit to the souls , for whom the supplication is put up, while that holy and most awful sacrifice is set forth.
3. And I wish to persuade you by an illustration. For I know that many say, what is a soul profited, which departs from this world either with sins, or without sins, if it be commemorated in the prayer? For if a king were to banish certain who had given him offence, and then those who belong to them should weave a crown and offer it to him on behalf of those under punishment, would he not grant a remission of their penalties? In the same way we, when we offer to Him our supplications for those who have fallen asleep, though they be sinners, weave no crown, but offer up Christ sacrificed for our sins , propitiating our merciful God for them as well as for ourselves.
   …

Gregory of Nyssa, also 4th century.

Gregory of Nyssa writes:
Chapter XXXVII.— The Eucharist unites the body, as Baptism the soul, to God. Our bodies, having received poison, need an Antidote; and only by eating and drinking can it enter. One Body, the receptacle of Deity, is this Antidote, thus received. But how can it enter whole into each one of the Faithful? This needs an illustration. Water gives its own body to a skin-bottle. So nourishment (bread and wine) by becoming flesh and blood gives bulk to the human frame: the nourishment is the body. Just as in the case of other men, our Saviour’s nourishment (bread and wine) was His Body; but these, nourishment and Body, were in Him changed into the Body of God by the Word indwelling. So now repeatedly the bread and wine, sanctified by the Word (the sacred Benediction), is at the same time changed into the Body of that Word; and this Flesh is disseminated among all the Faithful.

Got anything to say to that? :tanning:

Sure, they’re entirely Catholic. Nothing they wrote proves your point.

 

[Ockham]

Foaming at the mouth Fundamentalists are useful as flint in sharpening the apologist’s responses, but after that they are merely time wasters.

Every “gotcha” Scripture passage has been refuted throughout the centuries. The Catholic Church codified the Bible so trying to use it against her is a fool’s folly. The inherent contradictions of trying to disprove the Church with the book she created result in a ‘pick and choose’ strategy ignoring the logical and clearly evident conclusions.

As our current pope pointed out, non-Catholic Christians are not in full communion with the Church Christ founded and leads. The Fundamentalist fire burns deeply so this barrier must be extremely frustrating. Rather than walk around their self-imposed wall and enter the Chruch, the ‘foaming’ Fundamentalist bangs his fist against it.

I’ll pray for you mmm, but if it’s Christ you seek you’ll have to enter His Church at some point. The free will He gave you makes it your decision as to when. One advantage of joining the Church is being able to remain an ardent student of the Bible without the hypocrisy and contradictions.

 

[guanophore]

“I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error…as I have said already, it is to the canonical Scriptures alone that I am bound to yield such implicit subjection as to follow their teaching, without admitting the slightest suspicion that in them any mistake or any statement intended to mislead could find a place.”

• Augustine, in a letter to St. Jerome. 1100 years prior to the Reformation.

“The knowledge of our religion and of the truth of things is independently manifest rather than in need of human teachers, for almost day by day it asserts itself by facts, and manifests itself brighter than the sun by the doctrine of Christ.”
Athanasius, Contra Gentes, 318.

"This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures."

• Cyril of Jerusalem, mid 4th century.

“we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings.”

• Gregory of Nyssa, also 4th century.

Got anything to say to that? :tanning:

Thanks be to God for preserving His Word and His teachings through all these great Catholic saints.

 

[graceandglory]

Foaming at the mouth Fundamentalists are useful as flint in sharpening the apologist’s responses, but after that they are merely time wasters.

Every “gotcha” Scripture passage has been refuted throughout the centuries. The Catholic Church codified the Bible so trying to use it against her is a fool’s folly. The inherent contradictions of trying to disprove the Church with the book she created result in a ‘pick and choose’ strategy ignoring the logical and clearly evident conclusions.

As our current pope pointed out, non-Catholic Christians are not in full communion with the Church Christ founded and leads. The Fundamentalist fire burns deeply so this barrier must be extremely frustrating. Rather than walk around their self-imposed wall and enter the Chruch, the ‘foaming’ Fundamentalist bangs his fist against it.

I’ll pray for you mmm, but if it’s Christ you seek you’ll have to enter His Church at some point. The free will He gave you makes it your decision as to when. One advantage of joining the Church is being able to remain an ardent student of the Bible without the hypocrisy and contradictions.

Beautiful response.

 

[johnpaul87]

Foaming at the mouth Fundamentalists are useful as flint in sharpening the apologist’s responses, but after that they are merely time wasters.

Every “gotcha” Scripture passage has been refuted throughout the centuries. The Catholic Church codified the Bible so trying to use it against her is a fool’s folly. The inherent contradictions of trying to disprove the Church with the book she created result in a ‘pick and choose’ strategy ignoring the logical and clearly evident conclusions.

As our current pope pointed out, non-Catholic Christians are not in full communion with the Church Christ founded and leads. The Fundamentalist fire burns deeply so this barrier must be extremely frustrating. Rather than walk around their self-imposed wall and enter the Chruch, the ‘foaming’ Fundamentalist bangs his fist against it.

I’ll pray for you mmm, but if it’s Christ you seek you’ll have to enter His Church at some point. The free will He gave you makes it your decision as to when. One advantage of joining the Church is being able to remain an ardent student of the Bible without the hypocrisy and contradictions.

bravo ockham, beautiful speech

 

[johnpaul87]

Where did you learn that?

hey one holy, its nots news. peter never went to rome.

 

[johnpaul87]

I offered you the thread in Post #838 where you could actually present your honest thoughts and position on being “Born Again” as you have come to believe in the presence of the Holy Spirit but you ignored it anyway. So tell me truthfully, what is it you are trying to do here. Read over your list of responses below and tell me how you could possibly believe you are born again with the Holy Spirit while possessing such distain, judgment and lack of that which the Holy Spirit brings forth within the truly born again being the reflection of Jesus our Christ in Charity, Humility and Compassion. the vast majority of your posts are sarcasm but you want to be taken seriously as a born again Christian?

Your posts;

“one more thing, brother bennedict has refered to me as a liar. thats fine. all men are liars. so obeying the ten commandments will get you into heaven. lets see how honest folks in here are. raise your hand if you have ever bowed and or kneeled in front of a statue. this question goes for brother ben to. for, i never have. but ive broken most of the other ones.”

“one more thing, brother bennedict has refered to me as a liar. thats fine. all men are liars. so obeying the ten commandments will get you into heaven. lets see how honest folks in here are. raise your hand if you have ever bowed and or kneeled in front of a statue. this question goes for brother ben to. for, i never have. but ive broken most of the other ones.”

‘hey SHW, so the holy ghost hovers over the Church and protects it from error. do you watch the news? forget the news. lets see what jesus said. a tree cannot bring forth good fruit and evil. a well cannot put forth sweet water and bitter. if a tree has evil fruit, it is evil, from top to bottom”

“hey ben, well, i was kicked out of the catholic church, for the time being, by members in here. so, i dont belong to a religion, so how can i lie about it? what about your religion.? my grandma used to say…those who live in glass houses shouldnt throw rocks.”

“say ben, that hurts. you must have forgot that jesus said if any man come to me, i will in no wise cast out. you must be born again to enter heaven. jesus was rite about the big religious people; matthew 23; 13”

“hi east, never seen you hear befor. must be new member. welcome, friend.you say the faithful must adhere to morality? which faithfull? the pews or the clergy?”

“yeah thanks for this verse. too bad the unsaved cant understand it. hey SHW, see if you can get me immunity so i can talk freely in thei thread”

“sorry atta, the act of dunking in water doesnt remake you, as in born again.”

“wow jake, you figured me out again.apiscapalian, you found me out.”

“wow john. you summed it up pretty good.lets stick to catholic stuff. none of this other stuff.”

“sorry ata, that made not much sense. ask god to come into you. be born again. then we can talk”

Again, ask your questions and raise your points supporting your beliefs without sarcasm and in honesty if you want serious dialog.

hey, post 838, how do i find it? you have to give me more info on how to find that. im not ignoring you, on purpose. my computer was down for 2 days. some things are just hard to say without sounding sarcastic.especially answering some of the weird comments and ideas in here. especially the idea that one organization has a handle on dispensing god. i flaberghasted that modern humans are still falling for that old routine.

 

[johnpaul87]

I dont see the humor in laughting at salvation,and bringing the distenton,and vain babbelings here to discuss The Lord with clear mind and conscience. I can tell by alot that is said to the people I love here that it has been an insult for them and I leave you with this 1TIM::6:20 COL:2:8 Love of Christ Nancy Do not take this lightly,johnpaul

thanks nancy, ill try not to take it lightly

 

[johnpaul87]

Although this is a useless postion to debate, this link will respond to your statement that Peter was never in Rome seeing as how you are raising the question…

its too much to reprint here.

catholic.com/library/Was_Peter_in_Rome.asp

hey twb, i took a look at that link. wonderfull scholarship. it says that the bible never said he didnt go to rome.the bible didnt say not to make Me pope, so i should be appointed pope. refering to a catholic site to prove a catholic idea?

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

hey one holy, its nots news. peter never went to rome.

We sure would like your documented evidence you use to come to that conclusion. In any event, he is there now, as are all of his successors.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

This would seem to make a case for the existence of Sacred Tradition. The lack of Tradition and Magisterial unity seems to be evident in Protestantism. No one can make people believe what they are inclined against, so instruct in love and hope in conversion. Polemics is of no avail.

 

[johnpaul87]

This is true, jp. This is what we ask of God during baptism. This is what is meant by “calling upon his name”.

Acts 22:15-16
16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

If you have been to mass,then you know that Catholics make a profession of faith every time we participate!

Perhaps you have a perception problem? If you have been to Mass then you also have observed that Catholics ask Jesus to come into us at each and every Eucharist. We pray using this verse:

Matt 8:8
"Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but only say the word, and my servant will be healed.

We say, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word, and my soul shall be healed. Perhaps you are have hardness of heart against the Catholic mass, and cannot “see” these things?

Jesus did speak to the heart, but he also did not put up with hypocrisy.

This is true! If it did, we would be reborn every time we jumped in and out of the local pool!

Baptism, on the other hand, is not a washing for the body, but of the soul. It is in this regenerative washing of water, calling upon His name, that we are reborn.

Titus 3:4-8
5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, 6 which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life.

Baptism saves us by the washing of regeneration in the HS.

1 Peter 3:21-22
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Baptism is an appeal to God for a clear conscience because the hs washes away all sins in baptism.

We are all called to purity, from the top to the bottom. A failure of purity does not make Christ impure, or His bride.

No, but it is wrong to misrepresent the facts. you bear false witness against the Catholic Church, and this is a grievous wrong. you will be held accountable for tearing and biting the Body of Christ. you will also be accountable for your duplicity.

hey friend. the rituals in the church which everyone does is just that, a ritual. you want me to believe its a salvation factory. walk in, say this , do that and youre good to go. hey , more power to you friend

 

[1holycatholic]

hey one holy, its nots news. peter never went to rome.

Are you ignorant of the frequent historical references to Peter in Rome by the early Church Fathers, and of the archeological evidence?

Your claim has no merit.

 

[Earnest_Bunbury]

hey friend. the rituals in the church which everyone does is just that, a ritual. you want me to believe its a salvation factory. walk in, say this , do that and youre good to go. hey , more power to you friend

God deserves to be worshiped in the manner which the Church, your Church as you call yourself Catholic in your profile, founded by the apostles, designates. The Eucharistic sacrifice has been celebrated since the inception of the Church. Any 5th grade Catholic school child could tell you this, madam. The Church you disdain is the fullness of the revelation of God. Either you believe it or you are free to reject it. God is Love and knowing God is proved by love.

 

[guanophore]

hey, its nots news. peter never went to rome.

you did not answer the question, jp. Where did you learn the erroneous notion that peter never went to Rome? You are right, we have heard this error many times. Where did you hear it?

how do you dispense with the historical evidence? just ignore the facts?

perhaps you will consider a non-catholic source?

 

[guanophore]

i took a look at that link. wonderfull scholarship. it says that the bible never said he didnt go to rome.

The New Testament was never intended to be a complete history of the early Church. There are a lot of events that occured that are not mentioned in scripture, or mentioned only slightly.

This is one of the problems with “bible only” approaches to Christianity.

the bible didnt say not to make Me pope, so i should be appointed pope. refering to a catholic site to prove a catholic idea?

The word “pope” is a Latin term that was not used for centuries after the founding of the office of Peter’s successor. I think if you are willing to study the family history of your faith, you will find that the early Christians understood Peter to be the Rock upon which Jesus built the Church. This is why he was called Kepha, (rock).

The early evidence shows that Rome had primacy because both peter and paul labored and taught there, so it was a doctrinal hotbed. All the early communities appealed to Rome to settle disputes, because of the purity of doctrine distilled from the teaching of these two great Apostles.