How does a Catholic increase the chance of getting into Heaven?

[erikd]

If you belong to the Church of England (Anglican), your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.

And don’t forget he killed two Catholic Priests because they supported the Pope’s decision. The Church of England began with the death, by beheading, of St. Thomas More and St. John Fisher.

 

[guanophore]

Seems to be a little difference here; God says one thing and your Church teaches something contradictory IMO.

I can undertstand how it would seem that way, since you don’t understand either one.

Have you ever confessed to a priest for forgiveness and told to do something to be absolved, like say “Hail Mary” 10 times or something similar? My Aunt talks about this type of being absolved; is she wrong?

Yes, she is wrong. Prayer is encouraged as a spiritual discipline that will help make reparation for wrongs. When a person is praying, they are less likely to continue sinning, and can contribute to the healing of hurts they have caused. Absolution occurs “when we confess our sins - He is faithful and just to forgive them”.

My point is that if you are required or even asked by the priest to do something; it is works.

I disagree with your conclusion here, but it is really irrelevant, since the activities given to make reparation are after forgivenss. Not only that, the scripture is completely conditional. That means we HAVE to do something. That is the meaning of the word “if”. No confession, no forgiveness.

I do not expect to see anyone in Heaven that has a distorted view and belief in another gospel as the Bible teaches.

This may come as a shock to you, but the Bible is not necessary for salvation. Not only that, the Bible does not 'teach". This is an activity that can only be performed by persons. People that think the bible 'teaches" are really just teaching themselves, but believe the book is doing it. Accepting the paradosis prevents this. That is WHY the Apostles said not to receive any gospel other than the one they delivered.

The Bible does not “teach” Tanner. People teach.
There is nothing in Catholic teaching that contradicts the scripture. The NT is the product of Catholic Sacred Tradition. What is not in “accord” is you perceptions of both.

That is for you to discern between what the Bible teaches and what your religion teaches; if it is in accord with Scripture, then fine, but if not, then there is another gospel.

No, what we are instructed to do is hold fast to what was handed down to us from the Aposltes. We are not to separate the Scriptures written by them from their teaching, and comb thru them deriving doctrine from their pages. We are to understand what is written from the point of view of those who wrote it, which is Catholic.

While the security of salvation is a biblical fact based upon the finished work of salvation by Christ…,

There is a great deal of Apostolic Teaching and scripture that must be ignored in order to arrive at this idea.

When we place our faith in Jesus Christ for salvation, all of our sins are forgiven.

This does represent part of the Apostolic teaching, but this is a very truncated version. There is a great deal more to “placing faith” than just makign a decision, though that is a start.

That includes past, present, and future, big or small.

This is a modern innovation that also cannot be found anywhere in Apostolic Teaching. I have heard this before, and am amazed at how much of Apostolic Teaching must be set aside in order to promote such a newfangled notion.

Believers do not have to keep asking for forgiveness or repenting in order to have their sins forgiven, but do it in reverence and obedience, which give Him glory.

Boggles the mind. I have been told by Reformed Christians before that repentance is not necessary.

Jesus died to pay the penalty for all of our sins, and when they are forgiven, they are all forgiven.

I think this notion is at the core of what promotes the idea of easy believism. It seems like Reformed Christians think that the nature of sin has changed. It used to be that sin separated us from God, but now, according to Reformed theology, it doesn’t.

Colossians 1:14 “For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins”.

Acts 10:43 “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”

These verses, written by Catholics, for Catholics, represent Catholic thought. Your perception of them does not.

Your error is the believe in absolution from a priest and that the apostles had the power within themselves to forgive sin or bound sin; whereas the power is in the message, not the messenger.

The power is in both. The messenger carries what is given to him. You are wrong, though, about the source of that power. It is within them because God put it there, not "of themselves’. God authorized men with the power on earth to forgive sins.

Anyone who can present the gospel accurately can say your sins are forgiven if you truly accept the gospel message and likewise, those who reject the message will be bound in their sin…right?

Yes, but that is not the meaining of the passages.

You also misunderstand the nature of God’s forgiveness.

We do seem to understand it differently. Catholics believe that post-baptismal sin leaves a person is a worse state than the first.

A side note James 5 is an accountability issue. We confess to each other in order to help bear one another’s burdens and there is no greater burden than of carrying the baggage of sin.

The text indicates nothing of the kind in James. However, you are right about the burden. Jesus wanted people to be able to hear in their ears “your sins are forgiven, go in peace” that is why He ordained the Apostles to forgive and retain sins. Accountability, yes, but also the transmission of grace.

 

[guanophore]

The red; eliminates infant baptism, they don’t have the capacity to become Christians since they cannot understand sin; nor would they understand fasting.

Try to follow the context, Tanner. It is a liturgical manual for priests, and this section is on adult baptism. It does not "eliminate’ infants. Adults should fast and pray before baptism.

Most people baptized as adults don’t have the capacity to understand sin. This gets better over time. If that were a requirement, most people would never get baptized.

God saves the same yesterday, today and tomorrow; He does not change…it is by His saving grace, through faith in Christ (Messiah). He also does the choosing.

So, He really doesn’t want all to be saved or come to the knowledge of the truth?

**Tell me, what were you taught about justification and salvation before conversion to Catholicism.**

That we were white washed piles of dung.

That being “credited” was just doctoring the “books”. We are not really just, only declared just.

Where is Roman Catholic or Catholic in the Bible; at least the others are explicit or implicit.

The first appearance of the word Catholic used to describe the Church is Acts 9:20. The Catholic Church is not 'Roman". It was called this as an insult by her enemies during the reformation.

 

[guanophore]

You might want to take that large “C” and bring it down to a little “c”; as in universal, not Catholic or Roman Catholic. Changes the meaning and context quite a bit.

Not for us. This has been, is now, and will be the meaning of catholic for us. It means something different to you because you have been indoctrinated against her.

Show me in the Bible the baptism of one infant and I might agree. Show me the Eucharist - never mind about that one; that will open an old can of worms. sigh

Might being the operative word. Unless you can figure out how it is that infants and children are not part of households…

You were just shown a passage from an early father that you use when his writings seem to support your theology affirming the merits of infant baptism. You don’t want to believe that this is what the Apostles taught, and that all the fathers of the church received this teaching through the paradosis. This was going on for 400 years before the closing of the canon.

So there is “general revelation” and then “special or divine” revelation, which is the Scripture. Beyond that; there is no other revelation, nor does there need to be or else God would have given more…right?

Yes, God gave more revelation to the Apostles than what is found in scripture. Yes, it was necessary. He established a Church because it was necessary.

2 timothy 3:10-17 (for context) Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, persecutions, {and} sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium {and} at Lystra; what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me! Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. But evil men and impostors will proceed {from bad} to worse, deceiving and being deceived. You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned {them,}

This is all about the paradosis.

and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. Of course we all are familiar with this passage; Catholic tend to use this as proof that not everything is there because of the word "profitable".

And John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they *were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself *would not contain the books that *would be written. Catholics use this to also show that there is more, but if you look at the passage; it talks about the things He DID; not SAID. If you think of all the miracles and banishment of illness; it would take a lot of writing to get all the details…agree?

No, we don’t claim that not everything is there because of the word “profitable”. We have received the remainder just the way Timothy received it from Paul, through personal discipleship into the Apostolic succession. Since you have become separated from this Source of divine revelation, you have no way to know that it exists.

There are more passages used as well, but the main one seems to be 2 Thessalonians 2:15 “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word {of mouth} or by letter from us.” First the letters were written to church(s) in the area(s) Paul ministered; he obviously expected the people would understand what was written; it is understood because the Holy Spirit indwells true believers and guides them to truth; at the individual level.

Yes, but also, because He delivered it to them personally. However, you are wrong about the HS guidance. This gift was given to the Church. It is only available to the individual to the extent that one is in unity with the Church.

The question now becomes; what are these traditions that already existed? We don’t know; so either they are already in Scripture or we do not need to know.

We do know, Tanner, because we have obeyed the Apostolic command to preserve them. You don’t know, because your spiritual ancestors rejected them. You can excuse yourself (and them) by saying that you don’t need to know, but clearly the Apostles thought differently.

But you cannot make the claim that these traditions are part of the Catholic Church because they already existed and Scripture does not tell us one way or the other exactly what Paul referred to.

But they did already exist. Scripture reflects them, and is interwoven with them.

The scripture did not need to be exacting, because they persons to whom He wrote had already received them. They knew what he was talking about.

Any extra revelation fro the Church would have to be proven to come from divine origin; which it cannot prove via Scripture; unless you impose upon what the Scripture teaches.

I agree. Catholics believe that Jesus is Divine, and that His teaching is the Source of Sacred Tradition. It was not “extra” revelation, though. It was together with the scripture.

Therefore; "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance"[/qupte]

Notice they listenend to what was delivered to them, not going off on their own and deriving it from the scripture.
Tanner9188;5518953:

John 14:26 “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.”

This is a promise made to the Church, not to individuals apart from her.

The point is that it is the Holy Spirit that indwells individual believers and guides them to the truth.

I agree that this can happen. However, the HS does not guide individual believers in a direction opposite to what he has already revealed to the church.

It is not entrusted to a religion, but to the individual who has received the Holy Spirit; that's it-no exceptions or additions.

The Church, to whom this promise is made, is not a “religion” but His Body. Although individuals are members of her, and can participate in the promises made to her, it is not a promise extended to individuals separated from His One Body, the Church.

 

[guanophore]

water baptism is and outward profession of the inward faith in Christ;

This is also a modern innovation, found nowhere in scripture, or Apostolic Teaching.

 

[WASP]

I wish you Godspeed and pray you have the patience of Job; you will need it. They do not understand the Scripture in even the smallest detail as you can already see from the posts you are now getting IMO; so just be patient, don’t take the personal attacks personally; kind of like Father forgive them for they do not know what they say. Also, don’t expect to much Scriptural depth and a lot of contextual errors and a lot of miscellaneous Catholic material and Early Church Father snippets.

I have only been studying Roman Catholicism for a short while. One thing I have learned that surprised me is that every RC belief that I have come across is based upon Scripture. I understand that Rev 5:8 refers to the prayers of the saints. Although I believe that saints in that verse refer to Christians on the earth, I understand that the belief in saints interceding for Christians on earth wasn’t conjured up out of thin air. Also, I disagree with the RC view of the Eucharist. I believe that Jesus was speaking metaphorically (and I posted in another thread concerning this). The Catholic Church interprets it literally, but they do have a Scriptural basis for it. All the stuff about Mary that most of us disagree with can be supported by the Bible. Heck, even confession of sins to a priest can be supported by James 5:16 (though I believe that “one another” means any believer and not just one who holds office).

I appreciate seeing the RC interpretation on the Scriptures. For example, their writings on marriage/divorce/remarriage should be read by all Protestants. They faithfully consider Jesus’ and Paul’s sayings concerning the matter.

For this reason, I would love to know where I can find an online RC commentary that I can refer to.

 

[nuntym]

I have only been studying Roman Catholicism for a short while. One thing I have learned that surprised me is that every RC belief that I have come across is based upon Scripture. I understand that Rev 5:8 refers to the prayers of the saints. Although I believe that saints in that verse refer to Christians on the earth, I understand that the belief in saints interceding for Christians on earth wasn’t conjured up out of thin air. Also, I disagree with the RC view of the Eucharist. I believe that Jesus was speaking metaphorically (and I posted in another thread concerning this). The Catholic Church interprets it literally, but they do have a Scriptural basis for it. All the stuff about Mary that most of us disagree with can be supported by the Bible. Heck, even confession of sins to a priest can be supported by James 5:16 (though I believe that “one another” means any believer and not just one who holds office).

I appreciate seeing the RC interpretation on the Scriptures. For example, their writings on marriage/divorce/remarriage should be read by all Protestants. They faithfully consider Jesus’ and Paul’s sayings concerning the matter.

For this reason, I would love to know where I can find an online RC commentary that I can refer to.

Wow…I am quite surprised with your comments, and frankly I am touched that for once an avowed Protestant would acknowledge that the doctrines of the Catholic Church have some biblical basis…even if those bases may seem shaky to you

Anyways I very frequently use this Catholic website’s summaries on the biblical basis of the Church’s doctrines: scripturecatholic.com. I hope it would help.

 

[CentralFLJames]

I have only been studying Roman Catholicism for a short while. One thing I have learned that surprised me is that every RC belief that I have come across is based upon Scripture. …

This is an EXCELLENT attitude WASP and one that will naturally garner a lot of respect and patient attention in these forums and one that will be open to the illumining of reason by faith. I am confident if you can keep this kind of reasonable perspective and objectively open that the Holy Spirit will in short-order bring you to the inner insights necessary for overcoming the doctrinal hurdles you still have (which are quite understandable coming from the Protestants Tradition and perspective).

The Catholic Catechism is heavily footnoted with abundent references to scripture, early church council letters and early fathers and saints. I do not believe there is a more comprehensive and holistic integrative scripture teaching anywhere on the planet. The Catechism pulls every area of scripture together around multiple frameworks (e.g. Creed/profession of faith, Celebration of the Christian Mystery [the liturgy of the mass, the individual Christian vice The Church, the sacraments], The Life in Christ and Christian Prayer ). These frameworks bring amazing human intellectual and spiritual cohesion to the bible in terms and categories that one could never glean on their own from the bible. It really brings the bible message out and amplifies it and lets one see the profound symmetry and consistency from OT to NT and the larger picture of Man and how he fits into God’s plan. I can’t emphasize enough how important this work is and since it is based all on sacred scripture and also has sacred tradtion integrated it will bring amazing depth to one’s scriptural insights.

Here is a link to the Catholic Catechism:
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

The Eucharistic teaching is the thing that one must come to see as utterly holistic with respect to the entire OT and NT message combined. The Living Word of God, forever at Christ’s side is foreshadowed in the manna from heaven as the Jews rescued from bondage ( a metaphor for sin) to the Promised Land (a metaphor for heaven) and God re-birthing man (the parting of the red-sea - baptism and the gestation period of 40 periods/“weeks”/years in the dessert) etc. The Word is constantly coming to the Jews through the prophets - and finally God incarnates the Living Word of God in its entire fulfillment in Jesus as Messiah. The Pascal Lamb is prefigured in Abraham having the faith in readiness to sacrifice his son Isaac and the unblemished lamb – even the blood on the door lentil at passover is foreshadowing the cross - the doorway to heaven through the narrow gate of Christ. Christ becomes the Pascal Lamb - and Eucharist is given in the Upper Room - and practiced for 2,000 years just as the early church did in conjunction with their agape feasts.

I hope you can put it all together with Eucharist and see how perfectly it all integrates - right down to the manger (“feeding trough”) in Bethlehem - translation “house of bread”.

Keep forever in mind that the tough ready-to-die for their nation Jews would never have run away in fear from a mere metaphor in John 6 …

Pax,
James

 

[Tanner9188]

That you have come here to evangelize Catholics.

With all due respect, you are not qualified to decide who at CAF is saved, and who is not.

You seem to presume that Catholics do not examine themselves, and cry out to God for mercy.

You don’t seem to realize that CAF is not provided as a venue for you to 'warn souls". If you wish to engage in this activity, I encourage you to start a forum where it is appropriate.

This is true, however, that resident Truth Teacher was given to the Apostolic Church, and is not going to “teach” someone a “truth” opposite of what He taught to them 1500 years before. Of course every individual should read and understand scripture for themselves. This will not contradict what He has already revealed to the Church.

Yes, and one that should not take place in separation from those who made it previously.

The Apostles never separated water from the Baptism of the HS. Of course one needs both in order to be born again of Water and Spirit. Mud never healed anyone’s blindness, either, but Jesus can do amazing things with mud, water, wine, and bread.

Original sin is categorically different than personal sin.

is very humble of you to make such an observation. And it is made with such compassion.

No comment; getting tired of all of your whining.

**Evangelism of Catholics is against the forum rules; I respect the rules that are put forth and even request the admins to check my posts from time to time to makes sure I am not crossing the lines. Yet many Catholics do indeed cross the line, but everyone and I mean everyone who is here long enough will occasionally step across the line. It is at those times that a polite warning may be appropriate.

Personally I don’t really care when a Catholic crosses the line; it doesn’t bother me because I can chose to move on or not speak to that poster; thus discouraging the behavior; plus I know they do not know me and the topics are full of passion and zeal; so it is bound to happen. Only God can change hearts; no one else.

So with that I will finish replying or tell the other posters that it is time for me to depart from this thread and Lord willing; any unanswered question will be putforth at a later time.**

 

[Tanner9188]

I have only been studying Roman Catholicism for a short while. One thing I have learned that surprised me is that every RC belief that I have come across is based upon Scripture. I understand that Rev 5:8 refers to the prayers of the saints. Although I believe that saints in that verse refer to Christians on the earth, I understand that the belief in saints interceding for Christians on earth wasn’t conjured up out of thin air. Also, I disagree with the RC view of the Eucharist. I believe that Jesus was speaking metaphorically (and I posted in another thread concerning this). The Catholic Church interprets it literally, but they do have a Scriptural basis for it. All the stuff about Mary that most of us disagree with can be supported by the Bible. Heck, even confession of sins to a priest can be supported by James 5:16 (though I believe that “one another” means any believer and not just one who holds office).

I appreciate seeing the RC interpretation on the Scriptures. For example, their writings on marriage/divorce/remarriage should be read by all Protestants. They faithfully consider Jesus’ and Paul’s sayings concerning the matter.

For this reason, I would love to know where I can find an online RC commentary that I can refer to.

If you say so??? Anyway I am out of this thread; so Lord willing I’ll see you around and God bless.

 

[Tanner9188]

Are you bootstrapping your own sock-puppet Tanner or training your new disciple?

Your cheekiness and hubris is rather amazing to most of us here. Do you really think you are even in the deep-end of the pool and swimming with the tremendous theological depth of scriptural insights that Catholics here on CAF are giving you? Really?

Since the hubris seems to be leaking into your snorkel let me be frank here. I and I’m sure other Catholics here find it very challenging to dialog with you as we wade through the hubris and your superficial level of scriptural understanding. We are trying hard not to come across as “talking down” to you but here you are trying to do just that to us. So you can imagine how peculiar your fundamentalist leaning musings seem to most of us. Yet, you are good test-case for exercising the virtue of patience and charity.

Listen, everyone must begin somewhere in their walk with The Lord. Even the heretics while condemned by the early Church were still prayer for – while there is life there is hope for all to come to God. So we Catholics here do our best to give you what we think you are ready to receive:

*1 Cor 3:2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it.

Hebrews 5:13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. *

I invite you to consider that what you call “rabbit holes” are really an artifact of your own scatter-gun approach to shooting from the hip at all things Catholic. You target one thing and we answer you - then you swing to something else and keep shooting randomly all over the place like a kid on an open skeet-range with a case of ammo rather than focusing on one idea or concept-target at a time. If you want to learn - please stay focused on one thing at a time.

But you are right - we are not here to be taught Protestant theories or neo-Chrisian ideas that the apostles never taught and were unheard in the Catholic Church for 2,000 years. IMHO, you are wrapped around the axle so to speak on a very peculiar mixture of personal belief and a self-serving from the super-buffet table from the large combinatorial smorgasbord of pick-n-choose Protestant offerings. Heterodoxy is not religion - its a form anarchy - and disorder is the fingerprint of Satan.

As for personal attacks - all in all I think Catholics here have extended remarkable restraint. No one is perfect – especially me since I do tend towards St. Jeromes lack of patience for the unlearned who self-interpret scripture to their own destruction (ref: 2 Peter 3:16). But it is the very nature of all human pride that one can not see their own hypocrisy when making such judgements - you are as guilty as I or anyone else here Tanner.

So, as scripture says: Matthew 7:5 “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” And let’s review what you have said so far - not to condemn you but to open your eyes to the hubris that is blinding you:

TANNER’S PITHY AND SELF-RIGHTEOUS JUDGEMENTS

• Tanner Judgement1: I think I’ll stay away from the works-salvation
• Tanner Judgement2:Works are what your Church; are those rituals and traditions one must do to be in “effectual good standing” with God.
• Tanner Judgement3:There are only two types of religion in the entire world, the religion of human achievement and the religion of divine accomplishment. I choose the religion of divine accomplishment.
• Tanner Judgement4:From my own observations between Catholics, in the family and the neighborhood, and fundamentalist; it is the Catholic that win the sinful life outside behavior contest, IMObeservations
• Tanner Judgement5: If one does a Sacrament in hope to find favor by cooperating with God, then this is a graceless work.
• Tanner Judgement6:Since you have been taught that you must do these things in order to gain saving grace, then you do it from an unpure heart IMO. These tings are not in Scripture.
• Tanner Judgement7:I don’t even want to get into the early fathers; so esteemed by the Roman Catholic Church; the more I read of their writings, the more disgusted I get, but it does shed light on the evolution of anti-Jewish sentiment of the early through the 16th century Church and how one pope was so involved with Hitler
• Tanner Judgement8: The positions on marriage and celibacy, which many called a disease and adultery; yet while having concubines, and the scandals that continue to plague the church have always plagued the Church. Many calling the marital relationship a “venereal” sin; even with one’s spouse. I could never become of a Church with such baggage as this; and I really only touched the tip of the iceberg. I don’t see much of Christ in its historical past.
• Tanner Judgement9:No but I don’t need a Priest that has no power to forgive sins and is not Biblically defined either; probably living in greater sin than the one I would confess to;
• Tanner Judgement10:The acts of the past in Roman Catholic History are so bad; that it would violate some of the forum rules, but if you like I will be glad to send you some links, but if you are devout you are better off keeping your head in the sand IMO.
• Tanner Judgement11:Do you know that priests usurp the authority of the Father by pretending to have the ability to forgive sins; a priesthood that has no Biblical form.
• Tanner Judgement12:These are Romish invention and not supported by Scripture, “baptism by desire” Oh my God! 'a marty’s baptism" another Roman Church invention not found in all of Scripture.

[continued]

James

**Don’t confuse pride and arrogance with assurance; something God has given in His grace and written in His word.

Not only that but that is the pot calling the kettle black IMO**

 

[Tanner9188]

[continued]

TANNERS PITHY JUDGEMENTS CONTINUED

• Tanner Judgement32/PersonalTheology1 Your error is the believe in absolution from a priest and that the apostles had the power within themselves to forgive sin or bound sin; whereas the power is in the message, not the messenger.
• Tanner Judgement33:I follow Christ; you follow Bishops; glad we have that established in your own words.
• Tanner Judgment34:James it is very simple; but you do not have eyes to see or ears to hear. To be saved one must believe on the Lord Jesus with a true heart, not a professed heart, of repentance.
• Tanner Judgement35:[Why] do you think the Church invented Limbo; then had to write a book to explain it; those poor grieving parents who children were not sprinkled; that died. * Tanner Judgement36:do not understand the Scripture in even the smallest detail as you can already see from the posts you are now getting IMO…kind of like Father forgive them for they do not know what they say….Also, don’t expect to much Scriptural depth and a lot of contextual errors and a lot of miscellaneous Catholic material and Early Church Father snippets….They will give you some rabbit trails to follow…

Are you really sure you are saved bro?

Those who live in glass houses should not toss stones Tanner…that’s not in scripture but it is a good rule for the hypocrites and cowboy free-ranger Christians who live in their own fragile personal theology and do-it-your-own-way salvation churches should remember. Personally I think you are watching too many John Wayne and Cowboy and Indian movies…

James

James; if I were to do the same thing you just did; the picture would be real ugly.

But I would never even come up with such an evil intent. Perhaps you could add that to your list.

You will not have to even think of speaking to me again; for I will never respond to any more of your immoral nonsense; another to add to your list.

May God bless you with a heart of repentance; another one to add to the list.

 

[Tanner9188]

A question for Tanner and Md …

Are either of you two enjoying the Beatific life Christ promised to his elect ? If so, describe to the Catholics what a ‘blessed’ day in your life is like ?

Tanner complains the rules here @ CAF don’t allow Protestants to witness to their faith.
I thought I’d give you two the opportunity to describe your daily walk with the Lord to us

Present the reality of the Christ you know to us. Not theory, we want only the facts of Christ’s power and presence. Testify brothers !! Convince us you have the H.S. in a unique way — that Catholics do not.

Otherwise, drop all the hyperbole/braggadocio… and exhibit some gratitude for what you both are learning about the Church Christ founded.

**
I did not complain about the rules as you asserted and know; which shows you heart. The fact that you must ask for proof of something that you don’t care about concerning myself also reveals your sarcasm and insincerity as a person; much less a Christian.

I have testified to my faith in other posts; so in your sincere heart, perhaps you might look for it.

As far as expressing gratitude; again in your sincere heart; you will find testimony to this gratitude.

Lord willing; we will have another time to dialogue about the things of God, but I am done and just finishing up remaining posts. May God bless you.**

 

[Tanner9188]

Actually, as Scripture clearly says, The Church is the Pillar and foundation of Truth. So the Truth is found in The Church that Jesus Christ founded. So do you have any idea when your church was founded and by whom? You may find this enlightening:
If you are of the Catholic faith, Jesus Christ founded your Church in the year A.D. 30.
If you are Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk in the Catholic Church, in 1517.
If you are Anabaptist, your religion was founded by Nicholas Storch and Thomas Munzer in Germany in 1521.
If you belong to the Church of England (Anglican), your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.
If you belong to the Mennonites, your church was started in 1536 by Menno Simons in Switzerland.
If you are a Calvinist, Jon Calvin started your belief system in 1555 in Switzerland.
If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded when John Knox brought the teachings of John Calvin to Scotland in the Year 1560.
If you are Unitarian, your group developed in Europe in the 1500s.
If you are a Congregationalist, your religion branched off Puritanism in the early 1600s in England.
If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1607.
If you are Dutch Reformed, Michaelis Jones founded your church in New York in 1628.
If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744.
If you are an Episcopalian, your church came from England to the American colonies. It formed a separate religion founded by Samuel Seabury in 1789.
If you are a Campellite Christian Church, your religion was started by Thomas and Alexander Campbell and Barton Stone at a revival held at Bushy Creek around 1836.
If you are a Mormon (Latter-day Saints), Joseph Smith started your church in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1830.
If you are Seventh Day Adventist, your religion was founded by Ellen Whitein 1844 in Washington, New Hampshire.
If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.
If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year your religion was founded by Mary Baker Eddy.
If you are a Jehovah’s Witness, your religion was founded by Charles Taze Russell in Pennsylvania in the 1870s.
If you’re Church of Christ, your church broke of from the Campellites in 1906.
If you are Pentecostal, your religion was started in the Topeka, Kansas in 1901 by Charles F. Parkham
If you are Assemblies of God your church grew out of Pentecostalism in 1914 in Hot Springs, Az.
If you are a member of Four-square Gospel, your church was started by Aimee Semple McPherson in L.A. in 1917.
If your Church of Christ, your church broke of from the Campellites in 1906.
If you are Calvary Chapel, Chuck Smith founded your church in Costa Mesa, Ca, 1965
If your organization is “evangelical nondenominational Christian” your group started in the 1970s by protestants.
If you would like to learn more about the teachings of Jesus Christ, please contact the folks at chnetwork.org/. I promise, if you unite yourself to Jesus Christ through His Church, you will experience the great gift the He has promised to those who follow Him. As Jesus said, “He who eats My body and drinks My blood lives in Me and I in him and I will raise him up on the last day.” And He is faithful and sure to keep His promises. Repent, turn to the Gospel and be saved and you will have everlasting life.

I hope this helps clear up your misapprehensions on the subject.

Your servant in Christ

**Thanks for your interpretation of John 6, but like the true disciples that stayed and as Peter confirmed the understanding of the intent of the message when He said "Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. “We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.” - Similar confession in Matthew 16:18, the same truth or gospel message the messengers of the gospel from the time of the apostles till now have delivered from the NT perspective.

The Lord also confirmed in the manner to which He spoke these things saying: "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. “But there are some of you who do not believe.”

The false disciple are those that took the Lord literally as eating and drinking of flesh and blood and did not understand the metaphor; therefore they turned away from the Lord in unbelief.

God bless!**

 

[elvisman]

If you say so??? Anyway I am out of this thread; so Lord willing I’ll see you around and God bless.

Oh, Tanner - say it ain’t so!
**You never addressed my Post #311. **
Hmmm . . . maybe it’s just because you couldn’t . . .

 

[Tanner9188]

I have only been studying Roman Catholicism for a short while. One thing I have learned that surprised me is that every RC belief that I have come across is based upon Scripture.
For this reason, I would love to know where I can find an online RC commentary that I can refer to.

**
Here are some very useful sites I have bookmarked concerning a better understanding of Catholic faith and practices.
newadvent.org/
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM
oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Home
catholicfirst.com/
catholicapologetics.info/ This site is where I would recommend you begin.
If there are Catholics that disagree; please let WASP know directly; for I will not be retuning to this thread…

****(Edited)

Perhaps there are some Catholics here that can give reference to a website or two where testimonies of Former Protestants tell their story of conversion to Roman Catholicism.

God bless and Lord willing we will speak again and maybe here some comments about what you have learned from both sides.**

 

[Tanner9188]

Wait a minute. Do you mean to tell me that you consider the Early Fathers heretics? You consider **Clement of Alexandria,**Cyprian, Cyril of Jerusalem, John Chrysostom, Ambrose of Milan and Augustine heretics?? Turtullian and Origen later went into heresy. As for **their writings concerning Purgatory/final Purgation - they CERTAINLY **are not taken out of context.

---

As for Purgatory or ANY dogma - you don’t know your history. Dogmas are usually proclaimed when they are challenged or because of some heresy or other abuse.

---

You’re quoting from the ridiculously, historically challeneged and highly debunked Lorraine Boettner with the dates you listed.
ALL of the Fathers I listed wrote about Purgatory BEFORE it was proclaimed by Gregory I.

---

Finally - as for your claim that you can’t fall into serious sin AFTER being born agaion - you are DEAD wrong and you deny free will. This is why the brilliant Protestant author C.S. Lewis acknowledged, “God’s mercy demands Purgatory.”
Her is the Biblical PROOF that you are not eternally secure until AFTER death:

Romans 11:22
“See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God’s kindness to you, provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.”

Hebrews 10:26-27
“If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries.”

2 Peter 2:26-27
For if they, having escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of (our) Lord and savior Jesus Christ, again become entangled and overcome by them, their last condition is worse than their first.
For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment handed down to them**.
(This speaks directly to the Catholic teaching of invincible ignorance vs serious sin of a believer and/or apostasy.)

Matt. 7:21
Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord” shall enter the kingdom of heaven’

1 Cor. 9:27
"I pummel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified**"

Tanner9188:

Originally Posted by Tanner9188 View Post
They were heretics or apostates or both or the writings are taken out of context; probably some of each…take your pick. You really have to push the envelope on twisting of Scripture to get purgatory out of those versus; especially in light of what the Bible teaches that contradicts the whole concept, but it is effective at keeping you on the edge of your seats for life IMO and observations.

The concept of purgatorial sufferings after death challenges the very work of Christ on our behalf. The Bible declares that “Christ himself. . .had died once for sins” (I Pet. 3:18, J.B.V.). There is no more need for further sufferings in purgatory. To demand further suffering and sacrifice is to deny that Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient the first time! Jesus said that “he who hears my word. . .has life everlasting and does not come to judgment, but has passed from death to life” (Jn. 5:24, C.R.V.). The Bible also teaches that “if we acknowledge our sins, then God. . .will forgive our sins and purify us from everything that is wrong” (1Jn. 1:9, J.B.V.); that God remembers our sins no more (Heb. 10:17); that to die is gain, not torment (Phil. 1:21, 22); that to be away from the body is to be at home with the Lord (II Cor. 5:8, 9); and that those who die in Christ are blessed and receive rest from their labors and not excruciating pain (Rev. 14:13).
History: The doctrine of purgatory, instituted by Gregory I. (593 A.D.)
Purgatory proclaimed as a dogma by Council of Florence. (1439 A.D.)
The pope claims to be the mediator between God and men with the power over souls in purgatory. However, the Bible contradicts this claim by stating that “For there is only one God, and there is only one mediator between God and mankind, himself a man, Christ Jesus” (I Tim 2:5 J.B.V.)
Let the pure word of the Gospel of Jesus Christ stand!

Romans 11:22 Perseverance, gift of God, of the saints as evidence of Salvation - not about losing salvation. Hebrews 10:26-27 (similar to Hebrews 6) the one who fall are apostates and the one who persevere, a gift of God. Which both prove that you are OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost) look at the similar language in Hebrews 6 and look for the word “impossible” and thanks for the secondary and affirming passage in Heb 10…bless you. 2 Peter 2:26-27 confirms the same. Matt. 7:21 Take heed! 1 Cor. 9:27 again perseverance of the saints and looking forward to reward; nothing to do with judgment. I think that covers it; I apologize for overlooking that post. Goodbye, Lord willing for now.

 

[elvisman]

Romans 11:22 Perseverance, gift of God, of the saints as evidence of Salvation - not about losing salvation. Hebrews 10:26-27 (similar to Hebrews 6) the one who fall are apostates and the one who persevere, a gift of God. Which both prove that you are OSAS or OLAL (Once Lost Always Lost) look at the similar language in Hebrews 6 and look for the word “impossible” and thanks for the secondary and affirming passage in Heb 10…bless you. 2 Peter 2:26-27 confirms the same. Matt. 7:21 Take heed! 1 Cor. 9:27 again perseverance of the saints and looking forward to reward; nothing to do with judgment. I think that covers it; I apologize for overlooking that post. Goodbye, Lord willing for now.

Nope - the point of ALL of these verses is that you have no guarantee.
**Salvation is a process - a lifelong process that isn’t yours until you die. **
THAT’S what these verses are trying to tell you, my friend.

**Until then, we have a moral assurance that we WILL be saved - *IF *we obey God and do his will. There is no OSAS or OLAL, for even the holiest of men can falter and the most evil can be saved because with God - ALL things are possible. **
To believe differently is to reject the Word of God and that is heresy.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Thanks for your interpretation of John 6, but like the true disciples that stayed and as Peter confirmed the understanding of the intent of the message when He said "Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. “We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.” - Similar confession in Matthew 16:18, the same truth or gospel message the messengers of the gospel from the time of the apostles till now have delivered from the NT perspective.

The Lord also confirmed in the manner to which He spoke these things saying: "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. “But there are some of you who do not believe.”

The false disciple are those that took the Lord literally as eating and drinking of flesh and blood and did not understand the metaphor; therefore they turned away from the Lord in unbelief.

God bless!

Well Tanner, I can certainly understand why you want to hit and run here and why you shed all these crocodile tears after judging and condeming most Catholics here and denigrated our Church.

Keep this verse in mind “Those that reject you, reject Me and He who sent Me”

The “you” here is the apostolic leadership of His Church.

It’s a shame you must run now since you are living in a completly backward interpretation of scripture that is not supportable by faith, reason or common sense. I am truly sorry that we have shaken your faith with true apostolic teaching and that everything you have held dear and been taught is coming from heretical teachings have been completely refuted. That must be a hard impact to your identity and perception of self and it is no doubt embarrassing to you that your summary list of condemnations and personal judgements on all Catholics and me and others here hit home and did not put you in your best light by reminding you of them all. Maybe that opened your eyes?

Your parting shots here are most telling though. To say that those who left were those who believed in a false teaching on Eucharist are utterly disingenuous and anathema to Catholics. You really have a very opinionated and utterly wrong view of scripture that COULD NOT be FURTHER from the truth - the early church would find your personal theology to be unbearable to listen to. You need to study the early church history to see what the early Church really believed. You give private teachings that are COMPLETELY and UTTERLY AT OPPOSITION TO EVERYTHING the early Church and the Apostolic Teaching has handed down to us.

The Church Fathers were NOT the Jews who walked away from the teaching of real-presence. If you can’t accept the simple historical record then you can not accept the truth and you can not accept The True Gospel.
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).

“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165).

“[T]he bread over which thanks have been given is the body of their Lord, and the cup His blood…” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, IV:18,4 (c. A.D. 200).

“He acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as his own blood, from which he bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of creation) he affirmed to be his own body, from which he gives increase to our bodies.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V:2,2 (c. A.D. 200).
*

I hope you can come to the REAL Jesus and HIS Church and learn the truth someday soon Tanner. Good Luck because you have heard too much here of the truth and no longer have an excuse of Invincible Ignorance IMHO. You are not ignorant you are just stubborn and too proud to listen - that will not be good for you if you can’t overcome these vices.



James

 

[Ignatius]

Ignatius:

Actually, as Scripture clearly says, The Church is the Pillar and foundation of Truth. So the Truth is found in The Church that Jesus Christ founded. So do you have any idea when your church was founded and by whom? You may find this enlightening:
If you are of the Catholic faith, Jesus Christ founded your Church in the year A.D. 30.
If you are Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk in the Catholic Church, in 1517.
If you are Anabaptist, your religion was founded by Nicholas Storch and Thomas Munzer in Germany in 1521.
If you belong to the Church of England (Anglican), your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.
If you belong to the Mennonites, your church was started in 1536 by Menno Simons in Switzerland.
If you are a Calvinist, Jon Calvin started your belief system in 1555 in Switzerland.
If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded when John Knox brought the teachings of John Calvin to Scotland in the Year 1560.
If you are Unitarian, your group developed in Europe in the 1500s.
If you are a Congregationalist, your religion branched off Puritanism in the early 1600s in England.
If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1607.
If you are Dutch Reformed, Michaelis Jones founded your church in New York in 1628.
If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744.
If you are an Episcopalian, your church came from England to the American colonies. It formed a separate religion founded by Samuel Seabury in 1789.
If you are a Campellite Christian Church, your religion was started by Thomas and Alexander Campbell and Barton Stone at a revival held at Bushy Creek around 1836.
If you are a Mormon (Latter-day Saints), Joseph Smith started your church in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1830.
If you are Seventh Day Adventist, your religion was founded by Ellen Whitein 1844 in Washington, New Hampshire.
If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.
If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year your religion was founded by Mary Baker Eddy.
If you are a Jehovah’s Witness, your religion was founded by Charles Taze Russell in Pennsylvania in the 1870s.
If you’re Church of Christ, your church broke of from the Campellites in 1906.
If you are Pentecostal, your religion was started in the Topeka, Kansas in 1901 by Charles F. Parkham
If you are Assemblies of God your church grew out of Pentecostalism in 1914 in Hot Springs, Az.
If you are a member of Four-square Gospel, your church was started by Aimee Semple McPherson in L.A. in 1917.
If your Church of Christ, your church broke of from the Campellites in 1906.
If you are Calvary Chapel, Chuck Smith founded your church in Costa Mesa, Ca, 1965
If your organization is “evangelical nondenominational Christian” your group started in the 1970s by protestants.

Thanks for your interpretation of John 6,

Sorry my beloved brother, but you missed the main thrust of my post. Jesus Christ founded one Church, as He said that He would do.

“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

The Bible says that The Church is the Pillar and foundation of Truth. Jesus Christ does indeed have the words of eternal life. That is why He founded His Church and for several generations His word was passed down only through The Church, at which time some was written down.

If you would like to learn more about the teachings of Jesus Christ, please contact the folks at chnetwork.org/. I promise, if you unite yourself to Jesus Christ through His Church, you will experience the great gift the He has promised to those who follow Him. As Jesus said “Those who hear you Hear me, those who reject you reject Me”

May the peace of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the grace of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit descend upon you and remain with you forever.

Your servant in Christ