Forensic Justification - what's your view about it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Christian_Unity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you see my point, Catholics fight with each other all the time regarding what are the official doctrnes of the Catholic Church.
You’ll have to repeat. I don’t remember talking to you about this subject.
The CCC requires interpretation. The Bible requires interpretation. Official sacred oral and written traditions require interprettation. The Pope’s teaching and statement of “Luther was right on faith alone…” requires interpertation, etc.
There’s a big difference between the Catholic methodology of interpretation and the Protestant.

The Church uses Tradition, Scripture and and the understanding of the Magisterium through the centuries.

Whereas, Protestants just go by their personal interpretation of the Scripture. They cast aside the Traditions and the record of orthodox interpretations through the centuries which are the anchor which holds the understanding of Word of God to the Truth.

Did you address me by accident? Or did you open a line of communication again?

Sincerely,

De Maria
 
Yep, our view of the Church is completely different. When you are speaking about the Church, are those comments exclusive to the Catholic Church, or does it include other churches such as the Orthodox churches too? I’m not sure how Protestant churches fit in with your view of the Church which is both human and divine. I believe in the priesthood of believers in which makeup The Church consisting of redeemed sinners who are united to Christ by faith. The Church is the body of Christ which members come from all different denominations and branches of Christianity.
As far as infallible divine guidance, I think that is subsist in the Catholic Church alone, if I didn’t believe so, I would be Eastern Orthodox, if it were not either of the two, I would be a deist!

I look at the Catholic Church like this, you have a bunch of rowers rowing a boat towards a destination, many of great and mighty men by themselves, but alone they wouldn’t hit the mark of their destination without, a helmsmen, or coxswain if you will, who as a fellow team member, pilots the rowers towards the end destination! The rowers enter the water, having seen the destination on the other side of the waters, so what the do is, line up the vessel and shoot a back azimuth. The rowers will do their best to stay inside the confines of the azimuth, but all in all, if they do happen to stray, the coxswain will fine tune the direction of the boat, as their guide. The rowers love the coxswain, they work in union with him, trusting that he will ensure ,they reach their destination! Each man is also calculating, the wind that blows, considering the waves that render, and utilizing the current that draws, but the coxswain enables them to hit each mark with precision, almost as if he has been given a special gift to read the wind, anticipate the waves and feel the currents draw, he was made to be their coxswain, and they were meant to be on that rowing team. All the pilgrim voyagers rowing that sturdy vessel, know they could not out man the wind, the waves, nor the current, so they work with the wind ,waves and current. A fine tuned, well oiled, rowing machine unstoppable with the coxswain at the helm, all working in union with one another, reading the wind, rendering off the waves, and following the currents draw, its almost like they had no choice, but to reach the end, eventually! Truth be told, the wind was at their back, the waves were rendering them on track, and the current was drawing them towards their final destination all along. Almost as if it was predestined 👍

Eastern Orthodox have much of the same, they have seen the end, and shot their back azimuth true, they have some of the best rowers on any team, but they lack a coxswain at the helm to aid the mighty team on their voyage! The rowers have been working beside one another, it would seem like it were for, a couple thousand years, so they knew just how much, or how little effort to apply to the oar, in order to render the vessel on their azimuth! One problem is that all the rowers are looking back, in order to make a judgment on going forward, and the water is a great chasm to cross without a coxswain, good thing the wind is at their back, the waves are rendering them on track, and the current is drawing them, despite embarking on their voyage without a coxswain. But with such an experienced team working in union, they are bound to reach the destination, as long as the wind blows, the waves render and the current draws they are bound for glory!

Non-catholic Christians on the other hand have a different story, they have been instilled some great wisdom from past voyagers, they were told where the goal line is for starters, they have been shown how to paddle, taught how to read the wind, waves and current as well. But much was lost in translation in their vessel, they have come to disagree on the proper way to read the wind, water, and currents. They now have a vessel full of great men, with great strength, but lack cohesion, and organization. Soon their paddles start to slap against one another’s as they argue over which direction the pilgrim voyagers of old had traveled, the shout at the coxswain, but he is not there, they entered that vessel without him. They seek out the wise men, with great memories to reiterate what the voyagers of old had told them, but this wise man, and that wise man disagree, so some form camps to rally behind each wise man that they see fit to follow. The vessel they embarked upon has now been fractured, in all the chaos and paddle slapping, the vessel has broken into pieces, now each man must grab hold of his own piece of wood, many men float aimlessly, others paddle each and every direction, yet the current draws, the wind blows, the waves crash, and the coxswain of old offers up a life line, and many curse him and paddle off, while many others grab hold, as the wind blows, the waves crash and the current draws many torwads the end!

I think you get the idea of what I was trying to convey!
 
It seems like God uses the foolishness of preaching of the gospel to regenerate us instead of the sacrament of baptism. It also seems it is by the will of God (sovereign grace) that a sinners is redeemed and united to Christ instead of the will of man (free will). Please share if you agree or disagree with my understanding of these Bible verses.

Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. - James 1:16-18

The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. - John 1
 
ChristianUnity:
The NT Church together with those fallen asleep (OT Church) makeup one people of God.
Thanks. Great. So you are a Protestant who believes in the Communion of Saints, both dead and alive, that we are all one body of Christ. I am asking because I just want to know what type of Protestant you are. There are some Protestants who do not believe that the dead are part of the bigger Christian family. There are different varieties of Protestants belief and we have to know which one you belong to better appreciate your background.🙂

You were speaking of what makes up the Church in your post #207 and which I referred to then. Apparently not all Protestants agree with your definition there.
ChristianUnity:
I believe in the priesthood of believers in which makeup The Church consisting of redeemed sinners who are united to Christ by faith. The Church is the body of Christ which members come from all different denominations and branches of Christianity.
ChristianUnity:
When Job said my redeemer lives, who do you believe Job was speaking of?
I believe that Job was referring to God who put him through that test with Satan.😛
ChristianUnity:
Do you believe OT saints were saved by the person and work of Jesus Christ?
Yes, of course.🙂 We who are alive on the day the Lord comes will not go ahead of those believers who have died. … They will rise to life first; then we who are living will be gathered up along with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord – dead or alive.
 
As far as infallible divine guidance, I think that is subsist in the Catholic Church alone, if I didn’t believe so, I would be Eastern Orthodox, if it were not either of the two, I would be a deist!..

I think you get the idea of what I was trying to convey!
I agree. However, the major difference between the ancient religions and the Protestants is the validity of the Sacraments.

It is because of the valid Sacraments offered by the ancient religions that we get to walk on Mt. Sion with the Saints, while we yet live in this life.

But the Protestants don’t have valid Sacraments. Except a few whose Baptism can be considered valid. But even they, when they submit to the Sacrament, deny its power and thus condemn themselves.

Mark 16:16
King James Version (KJV)
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

IRONICALLY, this puts them in a strange position. They are the ones who call themselves saved. And yet, because they deny the power of God in the Sacraments, they are the ones who must await the Judgment before they are saved.

Whereas, those us of who await the Judgment of God, receive the grace to live amongst the Saints, when our sins are washed away as we call upon the name of the Lord.

Hebrews 12:22
But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

Sincerely,

De Maria
 
Thanks. Great. So you are a Protestant who believes in the Communion of Saints, both dead and alive, that we are all one body of Christ. I am asking because I just want to know what type of Protestant you are. There are some Protestants who do not believe that the dead are part of the bigger Christian family. There are different varieties of Protestants belief and we have to know which one you belong to better appreciate your background.🙂

You were speaking of what makes up the Church in your post #207 and which I referred to then. Apparently not all Protestants agree with your definition there.

I believe that Job was referring to God who put him through that test with Satan.😛

Yes, of course.🙂 We who are alive on the day the Lord comes will not go ahead of those believers who have died. … They will rise to life first; then we who are living will be gathered up along with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord – dead or alive.
There are a mix of Protestant beliefs just like there is a mix of Caholic beliefs (ex CA responses). I believe Job was refering to Jesus but did not know his name. When Mary said that she rejoices in her savior, do you believe she was confessing that she was a sinner in a need of savior, and she too was rejoicing in Christ but did not know the details?

I’m just a Christian and not much of Protestant in the historic definition of the world. I do embrace the historic ecumentical creeds like you do too, but also believe in a forensic justification version… Here is a challege for you. What gospel was preached to Abtraham in advance? Who is the seed? I believe that there is only one saving gospel which reconciles sinners to God.

Galatians 3:8

And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”
 
There are a mix of Protestant beliefs just like there is a mix of Caholic beliefs (ex CA responses). I believe Job was refering to Jesus but did not know his name. When Mary said that she rejoices in her savior, do you believe she was confessing that she was a sinner in a need of savior, and she too was rejoicing in Christ but did not know the details?

I’m just a Christian and not much of Protestant in the historic definition of the world. I do embrace the historic ecumentical creeds like you do too, but also believe in a forensic justification version… Here is a challege for you. What gospel was preached to Abtraham in advance? I believe that there is only one saving gospel which reconciles sinners to God.

Galatians 3:8

And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”
CU,

You are wrong. There is one deposit of Faith. There are those that understand the deposit of Faith and can express the deposit of Faith. There are some that do not understand the deposit of Faith and cannot express the deposit of Faith. The answers on CAF as you see them represent different understandings of the deposit of Faith and these understandings including yours do not change the deposit of Faith.

The Deposit of Faith is the deposit of Faith that is and is not changed by a view.

I am now listening to the Catechism in its entirety on audio and it is clarifying my understanding of the deposit of Faith. There are many that are better catechized than myself and many less well catechized than myself and that may and probably includes many Protestants.

One persons view does not differentiate what is. You may want to study the Catechism and see what the deposit of Faith is so that as you see differing answers on the CAF you can recognize those that understand the deposit of Faith and those that do not.

You don’t have to believe all you see in the Catechism to know what we believe the deposit of Faith to be…you will be better able to recognize those that are catechized and those that are not and you may benefit as well.🙂
 
I agree. However, the major difference between the ancient religions and the Protestants is the validity of the Sacraments.

It is because of the valid Sacraments offered by the ancient religions that we get to walk on Mt. Sion with the Saints, while we yet live in this life.

But the Protestants don’t have valid Sacraments. Except a few whose Baptism can be considered valid. But even they, when they submit to the Sacrament, deny its power and thus condemn themselves.

Mark 16:16
King James Version (KJV)
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

IRONICALLY, this puts them in a strange position. They are the ones who call themselves saved. And yet, because they deny the power of God in the Sacraments, they are the ones who must await the Judgment before they are saved.

Whereas, those us of who await the Judgment of God, receive the grace to live amongst the Saints, when our sins are washed away as we call upon the name of the Lord.

Hebrews 12:22
But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

Sincerely,

De Maria
You don’t like Protestants very much, do you? 🤷 . In a way, I can understand that since there are Protestants out there who say the same things about you as being Catholic in what you say about Protestants. Those Protestants see you as apostate, and consider you to be a not true Christian too. So, I do understand your hostility in a way. - peace and grace to you!
 
CU,

You are wrong. There is one deposit of Faith. There are those that understand the deposit of Faith and can express the deposit of Faith. There are some that do not understand the deposit of Faith and cannot express the deposit of Faith. The answers on CAF as you see them represent different understandings of the deposit of Faith and these understandings including yours do not change the deposit of Faith.

The Deposit of Faith is the deposit of Faith that is and is not changed by a view.

I am now listening to the Catechism in its entirety on audio and it is clarifying my understanding of the deposit of Faith. There are many that are better catechized than myself and many less well catechized than myself and that may and probably includes many Protestants.

One persons view does not differentiate what is. You may want to study the Catechism and see what the deposit of Faith is so that as you see differing answers on the CAF you can recognize those that understand the deposit of Faith and those that do not.

You don’t have to believe all you see in the Catechism to know what we believe the deposit of Faith to be…you will be better able to recognize those that are catechized and those that are not and you may benefit as well.🙂
I have to disagree agreeably on this issue. Catholics are just like Protestants with a mixed bag of beliefs. I have lots of Catholic friends. The CCC even has a Companion to the Catechism, and you guys struggle to try to understand the true intent of CCC references all the time. You guys debate within yourself the meaning of a CCC reference. When the Pope stated that Luther was right in faith alone, I started to read a mix bag of Catholic beliefs in what the Pope meant by it. We are all humans who know in part and the Catholic Church changes all the time: Vatican 1 and Vatican 2 views of non-Christian religions, relationships and status of Protestants, and other issues changes with the times. Heck, one Catholic on here considers me not to be a true Christian, and others embraces me as a sibling in Christ, all trying to reference official Catholic sources to support their mutually exclusive position. The current CCC probably has only been around for 20 years or so, right? So prior to the current CCC, how many other catechism were floating around out there?
 
It was alot more complex than that when you are describing Luther.

The saints prior to Luther always spoke of our own unworthiness and how it is the grace of Christ Who saves us.

Luther was a very tortured, scrupulous soul who chose to go into a most penitential congregation of priests. When I read about his reforms, they focus on the emotional reflecting a form of healing for him to be liberated from excessive introspection and dread of condemnation.

I took a class on ecumenism by a bishop who was on the council for this particular discipline at Vatican II. He spoke about Luther, we discussed Catholic teachings, and Luther was reacting to excesses not only to corruption in clergy, but excesses in devotional practices we still hold valid today…indulgences.

The sacraments are the 7 seals of Jesus Christ. Each one you remove of Christ’s work and presence among us, you sever that more deeply your relationship with the true Church, its roots, and your communion with us.

Because you are not Catholic and do not understand our faith, you perceive members here contradicting each other with points of the Catechism, when in fact they are correct, and are drawing on different angles to teachings. Our faith is transcendent and universal. We are Church, we are members of the Body of Christ and we are both drawn to the essentials of the Creed, as well as particular aspects of Christ that make us gifted in different ways.

When you no longer have an episcopacy as do the Anglicans and a certain branch of Lutherans…who are considered still by the Church as churches, without any recognized ecclesial authority and loss of sacraments, such congregations are considered ecclesial communities, drawing like to like. This is the effect of individual interpretation that results in the shattering of Christianity in the USA.

And that is what is sad. The construct of Protestantism is both protest against Christ’s sole church He founded and focusing on Christ alone.
 
There are a mix of Protestant beliefs just like there is a mix of Caholic beliefs (ex CA responses). I believe Job was refering to Jesus but did not know his name. When Mary said that she rejoices in her savior, do you believe she was confessing that she was a sinner in a need of savior, and she too was rejoicing in Christ but did not know the details?

I’m just a Christian and not much of Protestant in the historic definition of the world. I do embrace the historic ecumentical creeds like you do too, but also believe in a forensic justification version… Here is a challege for you. What gospel was preached to Abtraham in advance? Who is the seed? I believe that there is only one saving gospel which reconciles sinners to God.

Galatians 3:8

And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”
No, there is no mix of Catholic belief. We have the Catechism of The Catholic Church and Catholic belief is quite well compiled there. So there is no mix. Maybe you have heard some disagreement among Catholics but that does not mean there is many belief officially. Probably you may not be familiar with the structure of the Catholic Church, but we have an authority who sort of draw up that belief. I am putting it simply so that it is easier for you to understand. I hope.

As for Job. Of course it is possible that he meant the redeemer is Jesus. The Lord was being prophesied extensively by the ancient prophets. However for Job at that instance, he was more of trusting God who would eventually saved him from his trial and tribulation. He lived much earlier before Jesus came. Job is an excellent character of preserverance and trust in his God to save him.

As for Mary, of course, she needs a savior. The grace of Jesus saves her even before she was born because for the Lord there is no time and space.

I have read about Protestants belief here and what they say is that you cannot lump them together as a group. There are so many belief there and not all of them agree with each other belief. It is interesting, isn’t it, how the Church of Jesus can be fractured so much?

I have to think about your challenge as I am not very familiar about your belief. Frankly this is the first time I hear about forensic justification. I have Ito learn more from you on that. But you are free to ask question if you want to.

Ruben.
 
=De Maria;10048105]Then, you did not deny that Lutherans follow Luther, is that correct?
We follow Christ.
Then why doesn’t it say, “final” in the title? It just says “sola”. And “sola” means “alone”. And, alone is alone.
Alone regarding what? Alone regarding what is the final norm.
Then the Church is the final authority. Because it is the Church deciding whether something is right or wrong.
So long as Church teaching is in conformity with scripture, or at least not in contradiction.
Is that your answer? The confessions render the final decision? That leads to further questions:
  1. Then the confessions are the final authority. Not Scripture.
  2. In what sense are the “confessions” final? How can the confessions render a decision?
  1. For me as a layman, I am, as a Lutheran, bound to the confessions.
  2. The confessions include the doctrinal statements of the Lutheran Church, which are determined by the Church, using the practice of sola scriptura.
That sentence right there depicts the Church as the final authority. Since it is the Church applying the “final norm”.
Yes, using the scriptures as the final norm to determine said doctrine.
I thought you said, “authority” before. “Norm” is a different word with a very different meaning. What do you actually mean?
A norm norms, holds accountable, teachers, teachings and doctrine. The Church has authority, using that norm, to set doctrine. Its spelled out in quote I gave you.
The Catholic Church.
And Orthodoxy.
  1. In the Old Testament, the Word was preached as well as read. So that doesn’t apply to Scripture alone.
    In the New, St. Paul also preached. As did the other Apostles. In fact, they delivered the word of God by word or epistle. That is clear from Scripture
Semanitcs. why wouldn’t it?
  1. In addition, Scripture is not called the “sole rule and standard” in the Bible. Not in the Old or the New Testament.
Ithink I already spoke to the fact that, while there are parts of the Bible that lend credence to this practice, it isn’t statedspecifically.
  1. So, I would say that verse of the Augsburg confession is misapplying the Scripture.
Of course you would. 😃
  1. And it would also seem that the writers of the Augsburg confession set themselves as the final rule. Since their rule is not found in Scripture. They made it up. It is a tradition of men.
No more nor less so than the early councils.
The Apostles seem to hold the Traditions of equal importance to the Scriptures when St.Paul says:
2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle
Were those Traditions known, or not known? I would say they were known. So, for example, the scripture says that we, the Blessed Virgin was “full of grace”. We agree. It never says she was a perpetual virgin. And while I (and most of the great Lutheran theologians in history) believe she was, the question is should this be set as doctrine, binding the conscience of the believer.
Then, their own confession should be rejected. Since it is not in accord with Scripture.
Of course it is. As I said, I have no intention of convincing you contrary to your belief.

Jon
 
I am now listening to the Catechism in its entirety on audio and it is clarifying my understanding of the deposit of Faith.
Coptic - what are you listening to? Sounds like it could be a great Christmas present,…for me from Pie
 
=De Maria;10048154]1. The Catholic Church is correct.
In many ways I agree. I would sooner be Catholic than most virtually any other protestant.
  1. I’m normally very comfortable speaking about many things at one time. But lately, several people on this forum, change the subject and then accuse me of making bunny trails.
I have enjoyed our conversation.
  1. Suffice to say, that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ. Wherever the Orthodox differ with the Catholic Church, they differ also with Scripture.
    Jesus Christ established one Church. Whether anyone else agrees with the Truth taught by the Catholic Church, is besides the point. Truth is not a popularity contest. Truth it true whether anyone believes it or not.
Orthodoxy would say the same.
  1. The confessions, which I suppose is short for the Augsburg confession, does not reflect Scripture. If it does, please point to the term, “sole rule” in the Scriptures.
The Book of Concord
  1. Since the confessions obviously have interpreted things in a manner inconsistent with Scripture, then the authors of the confession have set themselves up as the final authority over the Scriptures.
I beg to differ, of course.
How? We are discussing what Scripture teaches. Scripture depicts the Church as the final authority. Where is the circular part?
You are using authority and norm as synonyms.
Because it goes against your argument. In Scripture, the Church is depicted as final authority.
Again, not from my perspective.
  1. Then you are admitting it is not in Scripture.
  2. You are also admitting that who ever made up the doctrine has set themselves up as final authority. Since they have imposed something upon the Church which is not in Scripture.
See above.
Practices which are important for our salvation are always in Scripture. Since Sola Scriptura is one of the Protestant pillars, it must be in Scripture or it is null and void.
Lutherans do not claim that you have to believe in sola scriptura in order to be saved.
Besides, the rule says that everything must be compared to Scripture. Let us compare the rule itself to Scripture. Scripture teaches something different. Therefore the rule called “sola Scriptura” is null and void.
Not everything, every doctrine. You have said yourself that the Church has the authority to teach. Does scripture specifically talk about how hermeunetics is done?
It does take discernment to come to the truth. But it is obvious that Christ started one Church. Not many. And the Catholic Church is the one from which all the others sprang. Therefore, She is the one Christ established.
there is only one Church. Lutherans disaprove denominationalism. There are more patriarchates in communion in Orthodoxy. Whose to say the one standing alone is correct?

Jon
 
You don’t like Protestants very much, do you? 🤷 .
If I didn’t like Protestants, I wouldn’t be trying to save them.
In a way, I can understand that since there are Protestants out there who say the same things about you as being Catholic in what you say about Protestants.
On the contrary, I don’t say anything close to what they say about us. I simply admonish Protestants about their errors and I take them to the Bible. Just as I have been doing for you. Your beliefs are completely against the Word of God in Scripture.
Those Protestants see you as apostate, and consider you to be a not true Christian too.
Many don’t consider Catholics to be Christian at all. Whereas, I acknowledge that anyone who claims to follow Christ is a Christian. But only those who accept the Sacraments are truly born again of the Spirit of God and therefore the only true Christians.
So, I do understand your hostility in a way.
What you call hostitility, I call honesty. You want me to go along with all your errors and traditions of men… Sorry. I won’t do that. There are people like Guanophore here who will sustain you in your errors. I will call compae them to the Scriptures and point out to you the errors just as I see that they truly are errors and traditions of men.
  • peace and grace to you!
And to you,

Sincerely,

De Maria
 
It seems like God uses the foolishness of preaching of the gospel to regenerate us instead of the sacrament of baptism. It also seems it is by the will of God (sovereign grace) that a sinners is redeemed and united to Christ instead of the will of man (free will). Please share if you agree or disagree with my understanding of these Bible verses.
I do not limit God’s ability to the Sacraments alone, so I do believe than one can be regenerate apart from a sacramental economy! I believe that God had a plan to reveal Himself to man kind through the person of Jesus Christ, and that plan included the establishment of the Church, where Christ would be made present as the Church operates through Him, with Him, in Him, in unity with the Holy Spirit, so the Normative way to know God, Worship God and to be united to God, is through the Church!

No I do not agree with what you said. I believe in Baptismal regeneration as the scriptures and Church declare!

I believe in the grace of God working in us moving us towards belief and repentance, so soverign grace and free will are not at odds for a Catholic. To answer yes or no on Grace and free-will would not address the faith of the Church!

These links address grace and free-will as the Church declares
calledtocommunion.com/2012/07/a-reply-to-r-c-sproul-regarding-the-catholic-doctrines-of-original-sin-and-free-will/

calledtocommunion.com/2012/09/did-the-council-of-trent-contradict-the-second-council-of-orange/
Council of Trent on Justification .
Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. - James 1:16-18
Yep, sacraments are a gift to us, as administered through the Church 😉
The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. - John 1
Do you think Christ can be received sacramentally, or not?

We Catholics believe the Sacraments are from God, not of men!
 
No, there is no mix of Catholic belief. We have the Catechism of The Catholic Church and Catholic belief is quite well compiled there. So there is no mix. Maybe you have heard some disagreement among Catholics but that does not mean there is many belief officially. Probably you may not be familiar with the structure of the Catholic Church, but we have an authority who sort of draw up that belief. I am putting it simply so that it is easier for you to understand. I hope.

As for Job. Of course it is possible that he meant the redeemer is Jesus. The Lord was being prophesied extensively by the ancient prophets. However for Job at that instance, he was more of trusting God who would eventually saved him from his trial and tribulation. He lived much earlier before Jesus came. Job is an excellent character of preserverance and trust in his God to save him.

As for Mary, of course, she needs a savior. The grace of Jesus saves her even before she was born because for the Lord there is no time and space.

I have read about Protestants belief here and what they say is that you cannot lump them together as a group. There are so many belief there and not all of them agree with each other belief. It is interesting, isn’t it, how the Church of Jesus can be fractured so much?

I have to think about your challenge as I am not very familiar about your belief. Frankly this is the first time I hear about forensic justification. I have Ito learn more from you on that. But you are free to ask question if you want to.

Ruben.
Thanks Ruben for your very nice post. I would say that there are very few verses in Scripture interpretation that is dogma for Catholics. I believe in regards to Catholic dogma and Scripture interpretation, the Pope spoke ex-Cathedra very little in regards to the number of Bible verses. So, the Catholic Faith has much room for discussion, debate, mystery between Catholic theologians and Bishops in the Catholic Church which is a very good thing. It’s okay to disagree agreeably… and respectful discussion is good. I guess the Magestrium determines when a belief falls outside of acceptable orthodoxy and is heretical, but otherwise, the range of beliefs on certain issue seems quite broad (similar to Protestantism). For example, on the topic of eschatology, can Catholics have a wide range of views as Catholics?
 
It seems like God uses the foolishness of preaching of the gospel to regenerate us instead of the sacrament of baptism.
I can understand how it would seem that way. When one reads the scriptures through the lense of Calvanism, much of it looks very different than it does with the lenses of Sacred Tradition.

It should also seem clear in the Scriptures that hearing the Gospel and coming to faith is NEVER separated from water baptism. So have the Aposltes taught us to believe, and so we still practice to this day.
Code:
 It also seems it is by the will of God (sovereign grace) that a sinners is redeemed and united to Christ instead of the will of man (free will). Please share if you agree or disagree with my understanding of these Bible verses.
Indeed, it is by the will of God that we are saved;

John 1:12-13
12 But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh **nor of the will of man, but of God. **

The Apostles taught that we are born again and united to Him in baptism. This is His will for us.

Rom 6:3-6
3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin.

The Apostles taught that we are “washed” in baptism, and that this washing is regenerative. We become “clean from an evil conscience”.

Heb 10:22
22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change. Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. - James 1:16-18
The NT was written by, for, and about Catholics, CU. There is nothing in it ithat is not Catholic. There were over 400 texts floating around claiming to be inspired when the Catholic Church chose 27 to be canonized. If there were any parts of any of these books they would not have been included.

Verses such as this should help you understand that the Catholic faith is not “semi-pelagian” as you have been taught to believe.

We are saved by grace, through faith, and not of ourselves, lest any should boast.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top