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

[Tanner9188]

Just more of your scatter gun approach here Tanner. We have called your personal theology “on the carpet” on various points and rather than defend yourself you just move to another condescending attack of Catholic teaching and belief.

And again, you make some more amateur mistakes. Here you would use the same technique of the demagogue to tell people what they want to hear - just like a politician. Tanner, do you imagine that anyone goes to hell but Catholics? Take away the emotionalism of the topic of infant death and let’s apply your idea that objective truth changes if one only cries about it enough and wants to ignore scripture.

False compassion does no one any good Tanner. If your child grows up to reject Christ and died unrepentant he goes to hell no matter how much you might want to comfort your spouse or his wife and family otherwise. And if you are negligent as a parent and do not baptise your infant child and it dies before the age of reason it is YOU who are at fault for any of it’s supernatural loss for not having been a responsible parent and declaring the child to the Lord (as all God’s people have done since ancient Jewish times). Although God is not limited to the sacraments and we hope in His mercy the Catholic Church believes every word of scripture and will not teach speculation as “dogma” to contradict what is written in scripture and just to pacify people.

Nice double talk Tanner. Why don’t YOU give us YOUR interpretation of “Where the Child Was” rather than being ambiguous and condemning Catholic insights that are not even dogmatically taught? You seem to be whining that the Catholic Church has not revealed all the mysteries yet – as if The Catholic Church speaks before the Holy Spirit reveals His truth.

Sorry Tanner but “papal infallability” does not mean “omniscient” (as you apparently think of yourself). The Catholic Church only teaches what has been revealed to it from the Deposit of Faith by the Holy Spirit. We have the benefit of 1,000’s of years and millions of man-hours of scripture study, historic and traditional insights and of course the Holy Spirit’s guidance. Don’t you think a qualified “Catholic opinion” on a matter has more pedigree than your opinion that is less than 5-30 adult years formed? Or am I too generous here?

Do YOU have even a clue about what the Jews in David’s time thought happened after death? Do you know that it was not until till the Wisdom literature that the Jews had any real solid hope for a resurrection? The most any Jew in David’s time believed in was a happy death where one would no longer be held to the exacting standards of God or be subject to His Wrath. Recall that even in Jesus’ time many Jews believed in the Sadducee’s teaching of NO RESURRECTION.

As an aside, can you understand why Christ’s message was so profound to the Jews? This message of repentance, faith and baptism was a double edge sword to the Jew - an enigma. It was completely exasperating to the Jew because Jesus gave credible teaching that there was no longer a guarantee at death to escape Yahweh’s Wrath for violating the letter of the Law; AND because there was a credible hope that the just and faithful man could be resurrected and gain eternal rest and friendship with God. The Jew felt trapped between the rock of the law and the flesh of a compassionate divine-human heart. The Jew had to make decisions as permanent and as life altering and as irrevocable as their ancestors did in the days of deliverance from Pharaoh.

So, since you are acting like you have the mind of God can you tell us what was in David’s head?

You keep saying Catholics teach works salvation but we keep telling you we don’t. But for the record do you have a problem with God doing works through His people?

James

James; David knew the child was in Heaven and he knew he would be in Heaven; just as he knew Absalom would be in hell
2 Samuel 18 -
And the Cushite answered, “Let the enemies of my lord the king, and all who rise up against you for evil, be as that young man!” The king was deeply moved and went up to the chamber over the gate and wept. And thus he said as he walked, “O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! Would I had died instead of you, O Absalom, my son, my son!”

2 Samuel 19 -
1 Then it was told Joab, “Behold, the king is weeping and mourns for Absalom.”

 

[Tanner9188]

If the teaching is explicit it should be easily found. Can you show me where in the Catechism this is stated? How about in the Summa? Maybe a letter from the Pope (ex-cathedra)? If you cannot show this, can you at least agree that you’ve made an error in judgement by making the above statement?

Find the links I provided from the Catholic site and see for yourself. Intuitively; “doing” the Sacraments as a requirement for salvation ir a works righteousness not found in Scripture; except for two ordinances, which are not Sacraments by Catholic definition, water baptism and Lords Supper.

 

[paul_c]

Find the links I provided from the Catholic site and see for yourself. Intuitively; “doing” the Sacraments as a requirement for salvation ir a works righteousness not found in Scripture; except for two ordinances, which are not Sacraments by Catholic definition, water baptism and Lords Supper.

Why are you telling us Catholics what our sacraments are? Particularly when you don’t know. there are 7 Catholic Sacraments, in 3 groups:

Sacraments of initiation:

Baptism
The eucharist
Confirmation

The sacraments of healing

reconciliation
annointing of the sick

sacraments of service

matrimony
holy orders

 

[brb2]

It seems that you are stating that the Catholic faith is a 'false faith", since we argue against your interpretation of scripture.

This belief and you own admission that you dont’ bother to “explain anything to the unregenerate” cause one to wonder why are you here?

It seems your entire purpose is evangelistic.

.

I doubt he really hopes to convert us to his theology and church. A church that he desires to leave ‘un-named’ / ‘invisible’. Perhaps he is ‘testing out’ his ideas on us, since he still has too many disconnects. He knows his theologic beliefs are not internally consistent with all that Paul teaches. And, his Protestant friends can’t spot his theologic error like we can … When [if] he ever starts winning the debate … then he will leave, because he will know he has arrived at the full Truth.

But, to win here … he would need the help of the Apostles and their ordained successors. He will need to attend RCIA and be Confirmed first. Then he will give up debating, and become a valued apologist … with some new found talents

 

[Tanner9188]

Erik, I’ll help Tanner out with a link. Doubtful he’ll read it, but…

Justification as explained in the CCC.

Indeed we also work, but we are only collaborating with God who works, for his mercy has gone before us. It has gone before us so that we may be healed, and follows us so that once healed, we may be given life; it goes before us so that we may be called, and follows us so that we may be glorified; it goes before us so that we may live devoutly, and follows us so that we may always live with God: for without him we can do nothing.51

2005 Since it belongs to the supernatural order, grace escapes our experience and cannot be known except by faith. **We cannot therefore rely on our feelings or our works to conclude that we are justified and saved.**56

2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man’s free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man’s merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.

Thanks for the rabbit trail; I am only at the beginning. Having the infusion of saving grace; achieved by doing the Sacraments, the Catholic invention, is implicit, arguably explicit, they are works because if you do not do them, then you cannot be saved.

 

[brb2]

You know what Tanner, I’m changing my mind: you are being guided by the Holy Spirit, because, well, I can scarcely believe it: almost every post you upload shows me (and I think every Catholic here) how right the Catholic Church is in her teachings…and your posts give us the reasons why. I think the Holy Spirit is guiding you to a grand big adventure in faith.

…

Great insight / revelation ?? Tanner … perhaps you are being led to the Holy Waters ?

And, do not call ‘unclean’ what God offers you as your ‘food for eternal life’ / his Eucharist.

 

[Tanner9188]

All bickering aside, Tanner…I did take the time to read this. Despite some theological flaws in the notion of instant salvation - instantly heaven bound…I must say his discussion of “belief” was very well-done, and is indeed quite compatible with The Catholic Church’s guidance on the necessity of humility for authentic belief. Humility after all, is the antidote virtue to pride, the original sin of man. So I did appreciate this reading. Shame we can’t agree on the timing of our worthiness for the beatific vision.Also, seems to me that instant salvation is incompatible with even Mr. MacArthur’s quite extensive, and relatively accurate, exegesis on the prerequisites for humility. Let me ask you, in this instant salvation theology, before you confess with your mouth, is it not absolutely imperative that you also have all of what Mr. MacArthur explains in terms of authentic humility? On that note, would you say that your own personal “instant salvation” moment (which I’m sure you can provide an exact date for - as all who espouse this belief can) was a moment in which you had a sufficient amount of this deep humility when you confessed our Lord with your mouth? Or did you have to repeat that “sinners prayer” moment multiple times…and each time you achieved deeper levels of humility…until you finally “knew” you had the sufficient level of belief/humility…and were then “saved”?

Don’t get me wrong…Catholics are taught about this imperativeness of deep-rooted humility as well. It is quite compatible, however, with Catholic theology because it acknowledges a lifelong journey of faith and sanctification, rather than an instantaneous judgment, and therefore allows for humility to grow as we work cooperatively with the grace within us, received when we were born anew in the Spirit (through our initial faith and baptism).

No, I cannot put an exact date on it; this deep humility before God is in itself the work of God. It does happen at the moment one truly believes, but to identify that point is difficult at best, but over time the truth is revealed because the Spirit does bear witness to the believers spirit that we are indeed children of God. I can’t explain how this works, but each believer knows it is as the Bible teaches. Perhaps MD could express this better than I can; but I will bet He can attest to what I said and maybe articulate it better.

Here is a copy of an email I sent to a struggling sister today; in fact:

Everyone has their struggles, both physical and mental; or they will at some time.

I have been diagnosed with chronic daily migraine headaches, Fibromyalgia, anxiety and some depression, degenerative disc disease (meaning I have discs in my spine that are arthritic in the neck 2, mid back 1, low back 3) I had in December my 3rd rt knee surgery and they found arthritis & I was told I will need a knee replacement in 3-5 years. I am in daily pain and this does not include the daily fatigue, rt shoulder, rotator cuff issue and insomnia. I am 43 years old this past May and have 2 boys, 4 & 9 and I am responsible for their care because my wife has taken over the “bread-winning” for obvious reasons.
I said all that to say this; dispite everything, mu primary focus is on the Lord Jesus and the advancement of his kingdom, my family and my neighbors and my country.

I always believed in God and thought I was a good person, but shortly after having our first child, the Lord began moving in my life. Matthew 7:13-14 was instrumental in getting my attention from the Lord.

13 "Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14 “For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

I read this over and over and memorized it because I did not know what path I was on and I see the seriousness here; God is not messing around because if you look at the rest of the chapter He tells many and I would say most, “depart from Me I never knew you”. That is the problem, most people claim to know God and can tell you many things that are true about God, but DOES GOD KNOW YOU; that is the issue. That seemed silly, of course He does; doesn’t He know everybody, but this is in an intimate way.

So I started to search the Scriptures, going to people that I felt had some sense of God and to churches, but it wasn’t till I was totally broken and realized what a pathetic sinner that I was in relation to Gods perfect holiness and that my whole life up till that point was treading under foot the Son of God. I had nothing good in me and I knew He did not know me. I cried and cried on my knees and apologized to God and like constant flash backs of all the crazy and stupid things I did, should have done and said to God and my neighbors including friends and relatives. I wasn’t the “good person” in Gods eyes that I thought I was. From that point I began taking God very serious and asked for forgiveness and to help me find the path to His love, His wisdom, His understanding; and God being faithful to those that ask and are truly broken; He opened the flood gates of mercy and grace and i have looked back a few times, being a weak Christian, then as my reading, hearing, and studying of the Word I have grown more and more secure in My love of the Father and His love for me. I can no longer go without reading or hearing His word everyday and I cannot stop praying throughout the day. I thank God so much because I never want to leave His arms and I do stray off the path still, but I am quicker to realize and come back as well. The life I had before is like a blur and now I seek the things above in every aspect of my like and do not plan on ever looking back; only forward.

My advice to you is to first look at yourself in relation to God and make sure He knows you. If you have done that, then you need to continually wash yourself in His word in as many ways as you can (reading, listening, praying) and He will bless you in ways you cannot comprehend, but it has to become the pattern and desire for your life and if you do these things He is faithful to carry you.

I pray that He increases my faith, I pray He will increase my love and desire for Him, I pray He will give me wisdom, discernment and understanding. I pray that i will be prepared to answer the hope that I have and I pray He will bless you this hour, this day, this week, this month, this year…right now.

Perhaps this will further your understanding.

 

[brb2]

**

Everyone; I am way behind and I am on page 56; so when this is shut down and I have not responded to your question or comments, that is why. We are nearing the 1000 post mark.**

Tanner … don’t worry

we can always start a Part 2 Thead on same topic Afterall, were all here to help you learn of the complete truth about Catholicism

 

[Tanner9188]

Patron saints are saints that are examples and supporters of various groups. There are patron saints of countries and professions, for example. I personally do not pray to any saints, other than Mary. Its not required to do so. Its a matter of personal choice.

Thanks you; I did not know that it was a matter of personal preference or not. i learned something new; thanks.

the Catholic church is unified on matters of Faith, doctrine and morals. these come directly from God through the Apostles and there is no room for debate. There is considerable room for debate on the area of Church practice, which is the “how” the infallible teachings of the church are brought to the people. The language used in mass is a practice, for instance, and not a doctrine. The celibaate priesthood is a practice and not a doctrine as well. on the other hand, The stand against Abortion is doctrinal, based on the fifth commandment and no devout Catholic will say otherwise. Same with the prohibition against divorce. That is also doctrinal.

Seems to me that part of that faith is the unity of Mass. Is there a link for the further study of what the Catholic church teaches as faith and morals; I’m more familiar with the doctrine, but you can include that if you would like…thanks.

 

[Tanner9188]

Oh come now Tanner. Are you not one who always would tell us that YOU are “full of the Holy Spirit”? Please explain how YOU can get “filled” with the Holy Spirit by a Pharisaical forensic/judicial declaration of IMPUTED grace that is not in you but through some divine bookkeeping “accredited” to your account?

Why are very basic concepts and semantics that you observe everyday in nature so difficult for you? I just refuse to believe you are as Totally Depraved of intelligence as you would pretend to here. Have the reformers brain-washed you that much and poured these silly ideas into your head that you are so intellectually corrupt that you can’t think for yourself to see the contradictions they teach you? No, here I think you are either being intellectually disingenuous or else you are holding to a double standard.

Just HOW can YOU say that a semantic of pouring (transmission) of grace from one container INTO another does NOT connote a semantic of infusion? Do you understand what infusion means? Infusion has always had a semantic of ‘introducing’ a certain modifying element or quality (often through fluid/incense/smoke etc.) that imparts a new “essence” into the thing that receives it. Hey bro, think pregnancy/rebirth or change of nature like a transformational yeast that’s introduced into the crushed grape (there’s suffering again bro) that becomes “spirited” and a new substance that has certain “grape” nuances in color and flavor but is now elevated in nature to fermented wine. We often see in the bible imagery of God’s positive restorative influence on man as a “thing” we call “grace” that is transmitted as if it was poured from God to man as if man is a container (e.g. new wine skins, pots, vessels, cups, chalice, bowels etc.). This pouring and transformational/infusion imagery runs all through the Bible. It is the same imagery we see way back in Genesis when God "“breathed into man’s nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being” (Gen 2:7). It is a masculine concept/act - a creative act of God the FATHER.

What is it that Tanner has a problem with in the concept of infusion? It’s a matter of possession that bothers you isn’t it? You don’t like the idea that Christ can GIVE us grace for us to OWN just as much as we own “Freewill” to be “ours” for all eternity (assuming we don’t elect to disgrace ourselves) do you? That is Tanner’s whole problem with infused grace isn’t it? You have been taught that you are filthy rotten good for nothing flesh who must be “covered” over with the Blood of Christ to hide your filth from God. That’s a pity that you have not yet been gifted with the wisdom to accept the LARGE overarching biblical truth that Christ came to make us new! Jesus is here to make us NEW from the inside out into NEW creatures from NEW parents (Jesus as new spiritual Adam and Mary as new spiritual Eve) so we can be reborn again as perfect and blameless creatures. God is essentially DESTROYING the human race and MAKING IT NEW through a new Adam and Eve - a sinless divine-human Adam and a sinless human Eve in a cooperative Divine-Human undertaking. Dude, wake up and smell the frankincense! This is GOOD NEWS. God could have obliterated humanity but that is not God’s nature - His nature is to Create and “make all things new”.

Why do you want to do arm wrestle with God and try to limit God’s generosity as Creator when He has consistently told us “behold I make all things new” (Rev 21:5). Grace is The Christian’s Eternal Life and the substance that sanctifies, elevates our nature and deifies us into a Child of God. That grace must infuse itself into our soul/being such that we progressively become that same nature by submitting our wills to God and taking on the divine-human form of Christ himself. We will not be complete until our divinized souls are in heaven and we are reunited with our glorified bodies. While we are here on earth we must learn to walk with this divine grace and “sin no more”. If we fall, we get up, confess our mistakes and seek our Father’s forgivness in the manner He gave us.

Your fundamental issue Tanner is that you do not believe you will ever be more than just a rotten corpse of flesh who is forensically declared “justified” (no matter how much you would reek like a snow covered dung-pile in the purity of heaven in your corrupt state of sin). You have no concept of the “big picture” of just how wonderful a redeemer we have that died just so we could be ELEVATED in nature to enter into a relationship with God that is actually and really worthy of God Himself. An animal can have no relationship with God. And we fallen humans in a state of disgrace could have no relationship with God except as shameful and disobedient creatures to be pitied. But God wants friends - lovers worthy onto Himself. So, Tanner you can try to hide yourself behind the fig-leaf of a thin veneer of Christian theology just as Adam tried to hide from God behind a fig-leaf (uh, btw, remember Jesus cursed and defoliated a fig tree bro). But if you only say that “you believe” but are naked in your sins and have not repented and been forgiven God will deny your entrance into heaven - no corruption or anything worthy of a curse can be found there.

[continued]

James

I have no problem with the term or how you use it, but it is not Biblical, which means it is not found in Scripture in relation to saving grace particularly.

 

[Tanner9188]

[fropm prior]
Nice try Tanner. But you can’t force the bible to speak your neo-Christian false teaching.
James

James, I am correct by the Greek grammatical structure of the sentence. Actually the English grammatical structure is correct as I posted as well. Why it reads like this is beyond me, but perhaps it God’s way of getting people to who really want it bad to really dig deeper or perhaps to put blinders on people who do not; similar to the parables Jesus taught.

Anyway; if you do not believe what I said, then you need to search and compare Scripture to Scripture and see if it is true. If what I said is not true, then God not only made a lot of exceptions, but in effect is mixed up as to how He saves; since He always saved/saves men the same, like in the OT and the NT on the basis of faith.

Listen to GOD, then you will have to say, well those are exceptions, then you will have to go through all the miracles of the apostles in Acts when they declared on behalf of God that sins were remitted without baptism by water.

Your response will be one or more of the following: a) throw insults b) avoid seeing the truth-most likely c) change the subject-real good chance

Acts 3:19 – (Peter speaking)
"And on the basis of faith in His name, {it is} the name of Jesus which has strengthened this man whom you see and know; and the faith which {comes} through Him has given him this perfect health in the presence of you all.

**In relation to Act 2:38 – (Peter speaking)
Peter {said} to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 3:11 – (cf Luke 3:16) "As for me, I baptize you with 1) water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the 2) Holy Spirit and 3) fire.

27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Acts 10 –
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we {did,} can he?”**
**
Can you get more definitive as this? Well maybe, moving along in Acts and stopping for a visit in chapter 15.**

**Acts 15 -
"And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as {He did} upon us at the beginning. 16 "And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 "Therefore if God gave to them the same gift as {He gave} to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ,
When does one actually receive the Holy Spirit? AFTER BELIEVING

Acts 1 - (Jesus speaking)
Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, “Which,” {He said,} “you heard of from Me; for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”**

Which baptism is the one that saves according to the Word? Is this the same as your “Church” or “religion” teaches? Is this a Church doctrine? Yes Is the Church really infallible or does the Bible just have a big fat error? You be the judge.

 

[paul_c]

Thanks you; I did not know that it was a matter of personal preference or not. i learned something new; thanks.

Seems to me that part of that faith is the unity of Mass. Is there a link for the further study of what the Catholic church teaches as faith and morals; I’m more familiar with the doctrine, but you can include that if you would like…thanks.

just google the Catholic Catechism and look at the section on living the christian life

 

[Tanner9188]

Now let us see, Tanner, if the Holy Bible passages you quoted supports your teachings or the teachings of the Catholic Church. I’ll use the reply you gave to James.

OK…and what happened after St. John the Baptist said this?

[13] Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him.
[14] John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
[15] But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented.
[16] And when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and alighting on him;
[17] and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”
Matthew 3:13-17 (RSV)

Hmm, does this in any way tell anyone that water baptism is NOT needed? Why did the Father say that He is well pleased with His Son? (clue #1: what triggered General Naaman’s cure again? clue #2: read verse 15) What does it say about water baptism when the Holy Spirit visibly descended unto Jesus AFTER he was baptized? Isn’t this descent of the Holy Spirit unto Jesus the baptism of the Holy Spirit you were talking about, Tanner? Is there any other part of the narrative of the Gospels where the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are manifested through the natural senses to all present? Can you not see how IMPORTANT water baptism is?

You are quoting out of context again Tanner :tsktsk:

Indeed, what? Let us see.

I answered already which ones save according to the Word of God, Jesus Christ Himself.

Yes. For it is the Catholic Church is the same Church that received the Holy Spirit almost 2000 yrs ago during Pentecost day, which is what Jesus is talking about here. As you will see.

Are you so sure? Let’s see what St. Peter’s actions in your next quote say.

Argh, tanner, you are quoting out of context again! Why are you always leaving out the parts that go against your own teachings? :tsktsk: For what happens after your quotation, in the very next verse?

[48] And he (Peter) commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
Acts 10:48 (RSV)

Now, can you see the teaching of the Apostles? Even if the baptism of the Holy Spirit has already been given, the baptism of water must still be given, per Jesus Christ’s commandment because **both baptisms are needed to be saved. **God said so!

[5] Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”
John 3:5(RSV)

continued…

**
That’s great you are making some headway by acknowledging at least two different baptisms. Water baptism is a command, but not for the reason you assume. It is the outward expression of the inward faith and publicly proclaiming the death, burial and resurrection of Christ;a public declaration of one’s faith in Christ and identification with Him. There is no where that it implies saving grace infused, but the indwelling of the holy spirit is substantial because He is the promise of the inheritance of eternal salvation. He is God’s promise to those that receive the Holy Spirit that He will complete the work He begins and finishes it at our glorification; just as He also promised. If you need Scriptural references to support this I will give them, but you are probably already familiar with them.**

 

[Tanner9188]

That is Acts chapter 11, not 15…but anyways…

Is that how it always goes, Tanner? Is that the most sure way of baptizing with the Holy Spirit? When One hears and believes in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that is the time the Baptism of the Holy Spirit happens? Always?

[14] Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Sama’ria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John,
[15] who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit;
[16] for it had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
[17] Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.
Acts 8:14-17 (RSV)

I want you to take note of these observations, Tanner:

1. The Samaritans received the Word of God (and that was most probably from Jesus Christ Himself; remember the woman at the well? (Gospel of John chapter 4);
2. Yet, they did not receive the Holy Spirit, contradicting your position, Tanner;
3. The Church had to send apostles (Bishops, not any ordinary disciple of Jesus) so that the Samaritans may receive the Holy Spirit;
4. The apostles John and Peter then laid their hands on them, and the Samaritans received the Holy Spirit.

Again,

[1]While Apol’los was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples.
[2] And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”
[3] And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.”
[4] And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.”
[5] On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
[6] And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.
[7] There were about twelve of them in all.
Acts 19:1-7(RSV)

And what do you know, there is such a thing as the Sacrament of Confirmation.

1300 The essential rite of the sacrament follows. In the Latin rite, "the sacrament of Confirmation is conferred through the anointing with chrism on the forehead, which is done by the laying on of the hand (by the Bishop), and through the words: ‘Accipe signaculum doni Spiritus Sancti’ [Be sealed with the Gift of the Holy Spirit.]."114 In the Eastern Churches of Byzantine rite, after a prayer of epiclesis, the more significant parts of the body are anointed with myron: forehead, eyes, nose, ears, lips, chest, back, hands, and feet. Each anointing is accompanied by the formula SfragiV dwreaV PneumatoV ¢Agiou (Signaculum doni Spiritus Sancti): "the seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit."115
Catechism of the Catholic Church

And yet, the Catholic Church covers the possibility of what happened to the centurion’s family in Acts 15, for before adults are baptized, they undergo the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults (RCIA), wherein the Full Gospel of Jesus Christ is proclaimed to the catechumens (the cadidates for baptism) prior both the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation.

So? During the RCIA the catechumens undergo what is called the Period of Purification and Enlightenment, during which they scrutinize for past sins and repent for them.

This period tends to correspond with Lent and is intended to be a period of increased introspection and coming closer to God. The aim of this period is to eliminate what is weak and sinful, and affirm what is holy. During this period the Elect undertake a number of Rites, including the Scrutinies and Presentations.
source

So now, Tanner, do you still really think the Sacrament of Baptism is still not needed?

another topic, another post…later…

Stay on topic; it is always the order, hearing, believing, then receiving. Water Baptism should be the very first act of obedience to the faith you have just believed. if you revisit you scenario in the sense, that is what happened. You must separate water baptism from saving grace; until you do, you cannot make the next step, but i commend you for acknowledging at least 2 different baptisms, really you may acknowledge a 3rd, because Jesus was a one time and unique only to Him. Add the fire baptism, which i do not want any part of based on it meaning judgment by fire…sounds rather frightening.

 

[brb2]

No, I cannot put an exact date on it; this deep humility before God is in itself the work of God. It does happen at the moment one truly believes, but to identify that point is difficult at best, but over time the truth is revealed because the Spirit does bear witness to the believers spirit that we are indeed children of God. I can’t explain how this works, but each believer knows it is as the Bible teaches.

]

If this be true, then why do you fight against the Church of the Apostles ? Has God called you to wage war and destroy the enemy … or to convert us ? Are you up to the task ?

How does God speak to you ? Audible voices, puts ideas in your head, visions, thru your pastor, or otherwise ?

 

[brb2]

**

you may acknowledge a 3rd, because Jesus was a one time and unique only to Him. Add the fire baptism, which i do not want any part of based on it meaning judgment by fire…sounds rather frightening.

**

Tanner …

What does Baptism of Fire mean to you ? Give some examples from scripture.

 

[paul_c]

**
That’s great you are making some headway by acknowledging at least two different baptisms. Water baptism is a command, but not for the reason you assume. It is the outward expression of the inward faith and publicly proclaiming the death, burial and resurrection of Christ;a public declaration of one’s faith in Christ and identification with Him. There is no where that it implies saving grace infused, but the indwelling of the holy spirit is substantial because He is the promise of the inheritance of eternal salvation. He is God’s promise to those that receive the Holy Spirit that He will complete the work He begins and finishes it at our glorification; just as He also promised. If you need Scriptural references to support this I will give them, but you are probably already familiar with them.**

I beg to differ. You just ignored the scriptural verses he gave you that support the infusion of Grace from baptism

From John 3:

5 Jesus answered, "Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.

How about this one from Acts 2:
37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and they asked Peter and the other apostles, “What are we to do, my brothers?”
38 Peter (said) to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit.
39 For the promise is made to you and to your children and to all those far off, whomever the Lord our God will call.”

 

[Tanner9188]

Hello?
Tanner, what would have happened to humanity if Mary had elected to say “NO” or had decided to abuse her role as Mother of God and attempted to harm herself and/or the infant Jesus before the Son of Man was born?

James

p.s. compare Mary’s fear with Zachrias fear in Luke 1 – Do not be afraid, Zechariah – Do not be afraid, Mary

**
I don’t know James; why don’t you tell us How what God has purposed might have been changed?**

 

[Tanner9188]

Rubbish rubbish rubbish. Since you are behind, you’ll see a response I have to this drivel of yours about your superior indwelling. So I’ll spare you most of it here. Click here to jump to it if you want.

Suffice it to say that your apologetics are cowardly, hit-and-run tactics that attempt to stand up straight on a self-proclaimed Christian wisdom, yet buckle limply to the ground upon close examination of your credentials. In other words, you have what look like the strong legs of Sacred Scripture supporting you, but they are ultimately hollow and weak inside, unable to support the weight of your reformist Christian claims, due to the fact that the substance of your scripture is diseased by personal interpretation outside of the apostolic unity and authenticity. If you can’t claim you’re infallible, what good is it to say your scripture interpretation is superior? Isn’t your indwelling superior to ours, Tanner? Then claim it, man! Tell us your interpretations can NOT be in error. Why won’t you do that? And look…when you do…I won’t challenge you. I just want you to be publicly accountable to God Almighty…I want you to openly profess your infallible interpretations before Him. Do that, and I’ll leave you alone with this challenge and questioning. I’ll leave you alone because I know that you have but one to answer to…and you WILL answer to Him.

**
All humans are fallible except for Jesus. I have never claimed infallibility to discern what Scripture teaches, nor do I need to. they will interpret themselves.**

 

[guanophore]

Since God does not distinguish sins in the way Catholics do; He will look at the degree of sin and just put one in a hotter place; especially true for the religious people on that broad road who claim the name but their hearts are far from him.

What is the penalty for one single sin? Death and hell. Pretty simple; God has not made things that complicated; He know how stupid we are…LOL.

Are you saying that you don’t think that God distinguishes between greater and lesser sins?