And what does moondweller says about this?
We may well make them Catholics yet James!!
As much as the grace you’ve been given.
As much as the grace you’ve been given.
[1]My brethren, show no partiality as you hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.
You too, QuickCat
What say thee?:
How is it that you are the only here that can divide infinity against itself to come up with the deception that Catholics teach a works based salvation?
You only have this irrational position because you are trying to force a round peg into your square hole of “SAVED”. You want everything to be a “done” event so you don’t have to worry or think about loving and serving God and avoiding sin.As I have said time and time again, do not take my word for anything; check the Scripture to see if these things are true or not; if so embrace them, if not reject them.
And may the Holy Spirit open your eyes to this:
Gospel = good news
Christ is the living Word, the imperishable “seed” as the beginning of the verse explained, but you may have overlooked. No one made mention of written word until you did. However; the written word of the OT was more than available; so you misunderstand.… and the ‘living and enduring word of God’ … would be a WHAT [scripture] or a WHO ?
The written scriptures were not, for the first 20 years of the Church, … meanwhile Christ was rebirthing hundreds of thousands in HIMSELF. Did not Christ teach 'I am the WAY, the Truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father, except thru ME".
You are mistaken … not Catholics
You can stop repeating yourself then. I think I can safely speak for the Catholics on this thread and say emphatically, WE DO NOT TAKE TAKE YOUR WORD FOR ANYTHING!
Why don’t you let MD speak for himself rather that engage your regular habit of making others as well as the scriptures speak through your interpretation of them?
) leaves this earth. This is the work of the saints and the miracles they leave in their wake and in the people they have influenced for “the greater good” for all eternity. I am still waiting for someone to point to a single Protestant “saint” who has confirmed miracles as evidence that a single Protestant has ever been “saved”. No doubt some Protestants who are invincibly ignorant of the Catholic Faith can be saved but I’d say its pretty obvious that God is not ratifying the error of Protestantism since He has not give a single deceased Protestant a single miracle to confirm as a saint. Is there any wonder that Protestant’s are so adamant in their contempt for the communion of the saints or their veneration? What is also interesting to me, anyways, is the problem non-Catholic Christians have in regard to what they term “backsliders.” Just exactly what is a backslider? Is it someone who has individually proclaimed himself “SAVED” at one point in time and then relapsed back into some old sinful habit after claiming to be saved? It leads one to wonder whether they were “SAVED” in the first place. No certainty, no assurance of salvation in this scenario.Why don’t you let MD speak for himself rather that engage your regular habit of making others as well as the scriptures speak through your interpretation of them?
I think MD has been pretty clear that he thinks SIN has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation and it is ONLY by faith that we are saved. In MDs world sin can no longer be an issue to us since that one single public “I believe” is THE ONLY thing one needs - ASSUMING OF COURSE YOU ARE ONE OF THE FEW LUCKY ELECT WHO “TRULY” BELIEVES. But of course this is where MD can’t tell us how to distinguish from a mere believer and a true believer or else might say something like “by their fruits they shall be known” - but never tell us how long the fig tree must produce before it’s cursed.
The thing you both hold in common though is the error of thinking salvation is is manifest only in the here and now and you fail to see that good works and spiritual fruit LINGER FOREVER after a TRUE BELIEVER (
James
****I’ll let the Scripture speak to this:
[31] Jesus said: “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; [35] **for **I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, [36] I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' [37] Then the **righteous **will answer him, Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'** [41] Then he will say to those at his left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?' [45] Then he will answer them, Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'Thanks for the advise. I can’t find a Catholic that "shares precisely" the same interpretation of the Bible , dogmas, catechisms, history et al. i can hardly, I can’t think of one, icluding yourself, that believe everything taught by your church. A vast majority are of the “Cafeteria variety”; so what does this say about all of you? I don’t know, still trying to learn more in that area.
Please quit beating around the bush. No, I just want to know: who told YOU that the Protestant Bible is without error?
**You are showing the OT Jews outward symbol of remorse for offending God, you will not find this outward expression in the NT; there are other OT outward expression that you will not find in the NT. You must put it into context. if Jesus or the apostles and other named disciples would have done this even once or twice in the NT, then I would or may agree. When is the last time you put on your sackcloth?
Where did Christ institute anything but water baptism and the Lords supper; or the apostles for that matter? No where. You cannot provide 2 versus in the NT to back this claim.
Thing; anyone who know the true and unadulterated gospel and can articulate that to someone can do the exact same thing; it applies to all qualified Christians and if you like I will give you a simple practical illustration to prove the point.
Good idea to keep yourself accountable to your brother and sisters and allow them to build you up in your weakness.
Practically speaking; did Jesus or an apostles ever do what you just described? Is there any mention in the Bible of “rent a priest” for implementing sacraments? Show me at least two versus to support your position. Keep in mind; an overseer, elder or shepherd are not the same terms used in the NT as the word priest is used; there are marked distinctions.
What you miss is the spirit of the repentant heart, which God recognizes and is directed to Him through His son. In the OT there was not the “pouring out” of the Holy Spirit, like we see in the NT. One major thing accomplished on the cross was the removal of a formalized priesthood and hierarchical structure designed specifically for Israel; not for the New Covenant church, which Christ is building and will be revealed when all the elect are called in. For now, we have the visible local church which has leaders that maintain specific oversight and duties toward each flock. The Chief Shepherd watches over the entire flock, made of little flocks. If you don’t believe this, then search the Scriptures. Revelation chapters 2 and 3 would be a good place to begin, since here Jesus demonstrates His authority of the the individual local flocks.
Tanner, none of this answers my questions. Not surprising though. 1 Cor 7 talks about the sacrament of marriage…and says nothing about the morality of contraception.
Wait a sec, Tanner…“if I want to increase my chances of getting to heaven???” …did you just reverse your theology of once saved/always saved?
Actually; no. that would be considered practicing the Lords Supper in an unworthy manner, IMO and understanding of the Bible, and there is sever warning for those that do. At the Last Supper, the Lord is pointing to His death on the cross and instituting the Lords Supper as a “remembrance” of the flesh and blood He was getting ready shed for the forgiveness of sins and reconciliation of people to God. To take this literally of the eating and drinking of blood are like the people in John 6 who turned and left in unbelief; only they did not start another religion based on eating and drinking of human flesh and blood. Jesus and the apostles make it abundantly clear in the manner to which He spoke in John 6. Plus it is a blatant violation of Gods command concerning the eating of human flesh and drinking of any blood; God does not change in this manner; especially concerning Jesus IMO. This is why you cannot pull one verse out of John and another somewhere else and impose on the text what you want it to mean; Scripture will interpret itself in its context to the whole of Scripture.LOL …
Tanner, everyone has their own style /// especially YOU. G-4 is not just 4-star, he is a certified TOP GUN ! I’ve yet to see you disprove ANY of his apologetics.
But, it’s good to see you have a long list of Catholic mentors @ CAF … who can speak to your errors in logic re: Faith & Reason
Perhaps your biggest to date is this nonsense that Catholics wrongly ‘Stress the Messenger before the Message’. I know you are a big fan of Paul’s ‘message’. Right ?
Lets revisit Paul’s MESSAGE … in a ‘nutshell’ for us ALL.
1st Cor 1:26- 2:5 "For consider your call, brethren; not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth; but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong, God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption; therefore, as it is written, “LET HIM WHO BOASTS, BOAST OF THE LORD.” When I came to you, brethren, I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God in lofty words or wisdom. FOR I DECIDED TO KNOW NOTHING AMONG YOU EXCEPT JESUS CHRIST AND HIM CRUCIFIED. And I was with you in weakness and in much fear and trembling; and my speech and MY MESSAGE were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in DEMONSTRATION OF THE SPIRIT AND POWER, that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the POWER OF GOD.
So … Tanner, tell us, based on Paul’s writings above … are Catholics wrong to LIFT UP CHRIST IN THE MASS, to celebrate him in the EUCHARIST ?
Recall this, Paul didn’t have a clue what the right message was … until he first was healed and knew [was known by] Christ.
Why do so many protestants teach ‘various messages’ … all claiming to be 'led of the spirit ? Paul makes the case that Christ Alone is his message. It is evidenced, after 2000 years of history, that only the Catholic Church, by lifting up Christ FIRST … has received and proclaims the ONE TRUE MESSENGER & HIS MESSAGE.
Come on Brother Tanner … exercise your FREE AGENCY rights … and join PAUL’s CHRIST’S ] TEAM.