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

[CentralFLJames]

What is easy believism in your world?

Easy believism is a person who practices the neo-Christian philosophies of the last few hundred years that are usually associated with most Protestant beliefs. Professing with the lips “Jesus is Lord” but without actually obeying “Jesus as Lord” and assuming one is forgiven of post-baptismal sins automatically for that belief without need for repentance and penance or the need to confess sins like the Church has always done for 2,000 years. It is a philosophy that actually avoids works in many cases and even sees good works as evil. Which is absurd of course.

Works are what your Church; are those rituals and traditions one must do to be in “effectual good standing” with God.

You need to stop seeing rituals and traditions as if they are sins. Jesus believed in rituals. He was circumcised. He washed the apostles feet. He had a habit of going to the synagogue on the Sabbath and read the OT and taught. He celebrated the passover meal and asked us to do that in memory of Him using His Body and Blood. The Apostles taught repentance and baptism and evangelized. The apostoles maintained the tradition of breaking bread etc. Note that ther was no tradition of protest in the early church. That is a new work of the devil.

But you have an erroneous belief that Catholics seem to think that we believe that rituals and traditions make one in good standing with God. This is not true. We believe that one is in good standing with God after initial repentance and baptism - just as the apostles did (unless you are calling that a ritual???). But one needs to maintain their state of grace by avoiding sin and if sinning gravely one must repent and confess those sins just like was done in the early church. Do you call repentance and confession a ritual?

Nothing of the sort is found in Scripture concerning salvation; it is 100% divine choice and it effect is from God through the death of Jesus. Since a person has received this divine saving grace based on God’s effectual calling; the person’s heart for repentance, also 100% the work of God, leads this person to God. This repentance, remorse and crying our for mercy is a gift of God to the called. For no one would turn to God, if God had not first turned into them. Once justified, a new nature emerges, one that has a thirst and hungriness for holiness; another gift of God. The perseverance of the called is effected by God; another 100% divine grace bestowed upon a believer. At the end; the glorification is also 100% divine in nature.

You must not read your bible since there are various accounts of healing the sick, people confessing their sins and breaking bread. God gives repentant grace to all men and it is up to us to respond to it since it is resistible. Are you trying to tell us that you are a mindless robot to grace and are not responsbile for your own behavior!!! This is the kind of thinking that leads to fundamentalists like Jim Jones and David Koresh and abortion doctor shooters killing people or committing suicide. Please don’t tell me you believe this nonsence that you have no free will to accept or reject grace!!!

The proper Christian teaching is that we get a new nature at baptism and a life long sanctification process starts. There is no concept of a once saved always saved forensic declaration of eternal salvation. Sorry - all are called but many reject the call. One must pray for the grace of final perseverance.

The only free-will we have before a sovereign God is to rebell against Him; something that a believer will be chastened for and the unregenerate will be condemned for.

Bologna. We have free will do cooperate with grace or to reject it.

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.

Book, chapter and verse please. There is only ONE religion in the world that is God’s - The Catholic Church. You choose a neo-Christian fabrication inspired by men who taught total deprivation and total corruption of man. Tell me, have you ever sat down and tried to work through that logic how totally depraved men can teach you perfect truth? Insane theology.

Keep cooperating with saving grace and working out your own salvation with fear and trembling; I will rest on the merits of Christ; for I have none to offer.

You express it wrongly. You need to simply cooperate with grace and come into His Church.

James

 

[Mick_Taylor]

1. Man is NOT created in a state of wrath before God. Man has a fallen nature and the stain of Adam’s first sin but God foresaw from the very beginning that man would fall and had a plan for His salvation. That is a portrait of a loving God not a God of wrath. If God wanted wrath he would have destroyed Cain or He would have destroyed the race of Humans immediately from the moment they fell. You have a very unhealthy view of God and really should not be pushing your personal nonsence on others.

Galations 3:22 But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

Romans 8:10 But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness.

1 Corinthians 15:21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.

Ephesians 2:1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins…

Collossians 2:13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins…

Romans 3:1-20 What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God. What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God’s faithfulness? Not at all! Let God be true, and every man a liar. As it is written: “So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.” But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is deserved. No One is Righteous What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”
“Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”
“Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
ruin and misery mark their ways,
and the way of peace they do not know.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

Romans 1:18-22 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

 

[Mick_Taylor]

1. It is not by our own free will that we receive or accept the free gift of salvation, but only by the will of God, who will have mercy on whom He will have mercy?
   This utter garbage. God wills for all men to be saved. God will show mercy on those who themselves have shown mercy and to those who ask for it out of sincerity. We are not mindless robots and slaves to grace as you would want to reinvent mankind here. If that were true there would be no reason at all for Christ to even have suffered and died. He would have just zappped us all with grace and “beamed us all up”. Without freewill one can not love God - ergo one must choose God out of love and stay in God out of love.

If, in His eternal plan, God wants and intends all men to be saved, then God probably would save all men. Since not all men ARE going to be saved, what happened? Is it possible that God’s grace is not given to every soul so that all men will seek Him? Is God under obligation to provide mercy and grace to every person? You seem to be trying to restrict God’s freedom (to will) in order to give sinful man unlimited freedom of will! Instead of placing fallen man’s “free will” on the altar as if to worship it, why isn’t God’s eternal and perfect FREE WILL given all of our worship?

Ephesians 1: 3- 14 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.

In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.

Romans 9:14-24 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” It does not, therefore, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?” But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ " Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

 

[Tanner9188]

I guess you didn’t see the entire paragraph I had in front of the vereses that demonstrat my point that one can’t gain heaven by a simply profession of faith???

Tanner somone has given you a very catchy phrase called “salvation by works” which bears no meaning to anything that Catholics teach or what I just told you. It’s a convenient scape goat to allow one to fabricate a strawman to give an excuse from having to confront the clear truth; a convenient way to hide from the the many verses that prove you must do more than just profess a simply belief that Christ can save you. This could be turned around on you and one could just claim your profession of faith is just another version of a work’s based salvation. That is, you are doing the mental work of coming to belief and then doing the simple work of the tongue to say it. In your works based salvation its just a one time legal declaration with a simple “I believe” and then you are free to do anything you want since in your system sin is just a figment of your imagination and you can not longer do any wrong as a believer. This is of course obsence to common standards of judgement. Since this kind of easy-believism permits sin to become a statement of faith and trust in The Lord. But this nonsence since Christ told us we must strive to be holy as our heavenly father is holy. Faith must be tested and one is not saved until God judges them saved. Contrary to the error of Protestant thinking God is NOT required to declare you saved at the instant you say you believe. Nope. You must run the good race all the way to completion just as Paul taught. Remember that. No one who sins gravely and does not repent each time will not be permitted to enter God’s Kingdom with the magic words “I believe”.

James

**Romans 6 was written just for your preconceived notion that “believing” is a free-pass to engage in wanton sin. Nothing could be further from the truth and anyone who lives like that may have a head knowledge and a profession, but does not have a heart for God.

Romans 6:1-9 “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? 2 May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have become united with {Him} in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be {in the likeness} of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with {Him,} in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; 7 for he who has died is freed from sin. 8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him.”

The baptism is the spiritual baptism, the receiving of the Holy Spirit, not the water type - FYI**

 

[CentralFLJames]

Galations 3:22 But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

Romans 8:10 But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness.

1 Corinthians 15:21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.

Ephesians 2:1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins…

Collossians 2:13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins…

Romans 3:1-20 What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God. What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God’s faithfulness? Not at all! Let God be true, and every man a liar. As it is written: “So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.” But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is deserved. No One is Righteous What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”
“Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”
“Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
ruin and misery mark their ways,
and the way of peace they do not know.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

Romans 1:18-22 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Mike can you please show more reverence for scripture and not use it to SPAM us with your ridiculous ideas that have no bearing at all to what you are reference here? Please?

Use the brain God has given you and explain your faith and resolve the many inconsistencies it has with the whole entire bible. You can reference scripture but don’t need to quote it all verbatim. Just flinging scripture all over the place does not make your argument for you. None of this mentions God’s wrath for man and in fact proves God’s love of man in His Divine Plan to offer all salvation.

NO ONE is CREATED TO BE DAMNED. That would be a cruel God and an unjust God. God permits us all to use our free will to cooperate with God or to reject God and will force no one to love or hate him. And those who try to straddle the fence and be in the middle to play both sides we call “lukewarm” and these are judged evil in God’s eyes for loving the created more or equal to the Creator.

I am not going to respond to any more of your posts if you can’t string together more than one thought without all the verse slinging.

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

Romans 6 was written just for your preconceived notion that “believing” is a free-pass to engage in wanton sin. Nothing could be further from the truth and anyone who lives like that may have a head knowledge and a profession, but does not have a heart for God.
…
The baptism is the spiritual baptism, the receiving of the Holy Spirit, not the water type - FYI

Bravo Tanner you are not as fundamentalist as I had imagined. Indeed no one is free to sin even if calling oneself a “believer” yet there are quite a few Southern Baptists and others who think that sin becomes obsolete once one accepts Jesus as their savior.

But your comment on baptism being not of the water variety is completely wrong. While it is possible to receive what we call a baptism by desire in some unusual cases where a person has no opportunity to be baptised due to remoteness or cultural distance from a Christian to baptise them the normative means is by water. If water was not the normative means then the Eunuch speaking to Paul certainly would not have asked Paul to baptise him when he saw the river and could have just smiled and said “I believe and I am saved” but he did not now did he?

Proof of water baptism:
I. Born Again in Water Baptism

John 1:32 - when Jesus was baptized, He was baptized in the water and the Spirit, which descended upon Him in the form of a dove. The Holy Spirit and water are required for baptism. Also, Jesus’ baptism was not the Christian baptism He later instituted. Jesus’ baptism was instead a royal anointing of the Son of David (Jesus) conferred by a Levite (John the Baptist) to reveal Christ to Israel, as it was foreshadowed in 1 Kings 1:39 when the Son of David (Solomon) was anointed by the Levitical priest Zadok. See John 1:31; cf. Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:9; Luke 3:21.

John 3:3,5 - Jesus says, “Truly, truly, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” When Jesus said “water and the Spirit,” He was referring to baptism (which requires the use of water, and the work of the Spirit).

John 3:22 - after teaching on baptism, John says Jesus and the disciples did what? They went into Judea where the disciples baptized. Jesus’ teaching about being reborn by water and the Spirit is in the context of baptism.

John 4:1 - here is another reference to baptism which naturally flows from Jesus’ baptismal teaching in John 3:3-5.

Acts 8:36 – the eunuch recognizes the necessity of water for his baptism. Water and baptism are never separated in the Scriptures.

Acts 10:47 - Peter says “can anyone forbid water for baptizing these people…?” The Bible always links water and baptism.

Acts 22:16 – Ananias tells Saul, “arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins.” The “washing away” refers to water baptism.

Titus 3:5-6 – Paul writes about the “washing of regeneration,” which is “poured out on us” in reference to water baptism. “Washing” (loutron) generally refers to a ritual washing with water.

Heb. 10:22 – the author is also writing about water baptism in this verse. “Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.” Our bodies are washed with pure water in water baptism.

2 Kings 5:14 - Naaman dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, and his flesh was restored like that of a child. This foreshadows the regenerative function of baptism, by water and the Holy Spirit.

Isaiah 44:3 - the Lord pours out His water and His Spirit. Water and the Spirit are linked to baptism. The Bible never separates them.

Ezek. 36:25-27 - the Lord promises He will sprinkle us with water to cleanse us from sin and give us a new heart and spirit. Paul refers to this verse in Heb. 10:22. The teaching of Ezekiel foreshadows the salvific nature of Christian baptism instituted by Jesus and taught in John 3:5, Titus 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21 and Acts 22:16.

II. Baptism is Salvific, Not Just Symbolic
Matt. 28:19-20 - Jesus commands the apostles to baptize all people “in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” Many Protestant churches are now teaching that baptism is only a symbolic ritual, and not what actually cleanses us from original sin. This belief contradicts Scripture and the 2,000 year-old teaching of the Church.

Acts 2:38 - Peter commands them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in order to be actually forgiven of sin, not just to partake of a symbolic ritual.

Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 2:38 - there is nothing in these passages or elsewhere in the Bible about baptism being symbolic. There is also nothing about just accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior in order to be saved.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus said “He who believes AND is baptized will be saved.” Jesus says believing is not enough. Baptism is also required. This is because baptism is salvific, not just symbolic. The Greek text also does not mandate any specific order for belief and baptism, so the verse proves nothing about a “believer’s baptism.”

John 3:3,5 - unless we are “born again” of water and Spirit in baptism, we cannot enter into the kingdom of God. The Greek word for the phrase “born again” is “anothen” which literally means “begotten from above.” See, for example, John 3:31 where “anothen” is so used. Baptism brings about salvation, not just a symbolism of our salvation.

Acts 8:12-13; 36; 10:47 - if belief is all one needs to be saved, why is everyone instantly baptized after learning of Jesus?

Acts 16:15; 31-33; 18:8; 19:2,5 - these texts present more examples of people learning of Jesus, and then immediately being baptized. If accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior is all one needs to do to be saved, then why does everyone in the early Church immediately seek baptism?

More here: scripturecatholic.com/baptism.html

James

 

[TristanCross]

Your goal shouldn’t be trying to earn heaven. Your goal should be to please God.

From my Bible (The International Student Bible For Catholics):

How To Become A Better Catholic. The Ten Steps:

1. Read Your Bible!
2. Pray Every Day
3. Tell Someone You Respect About Your [New] Commitment To Christ.
4. Go To Church.
5. Go For The Sacraments.
6. Keep A Daily Journal [About Your Spiritual Journey].
7. Find Out More About What The Catholic Church Teaches And Why.
8. Share Your Faith With Others-Especially Other Young People
9. Put Your Faith Into Practice
10. Thank God Every Day That You’ve Received This Gift Of Faith

 

[CentralFLJames]

If, in His eternal plan, God wants and intends all men to be saved, then God probably would save all men. Since not all men ARE going to be saved, what happened? Is it possible that God’s grace is not given to every soul so that all men will seek Him? Is God under obligation to provide mercy and grace to every person? You seem to be trying to restrict God’s freedom (to will) in order to give sinful man unlimited freedom of will! Instead of placing fallen man’s “free will” on the altar as if to worship it, why isn’t God’s eternal and perfect FREE WILL given all of our worship?

Mike please when you quote scripture italicise it or leave the verse numbers embedded so we can tell when you are adding your own words around it or using it whole. And don’t quote entire or near whole chapters since we can look it up if we need to.

God’s grace is given to all men without prejudice to his knowledge about who will accept and who will reject. That is a just God a God that shows no impartiality. If however a person spurns God He may elect to harden their hearts - but always with His intention to make them repent as they come to suffer the whithering effects of sin and discover that apart from Him they can do nothing at all good. It is ALWAYS man’s choice while he has the gift of life to decide for or against God; and this also means that one may turn away from God after having accepted Him previously.
When God speaks of showing His Mercy to whom he shall this is in regards to the man who was not justified in his acceptance of God and perhaps was petitioned or referred to God by the prayers of his friends to show mercy. God is simply saying that His Mercy is greater than His justice and He is under no forensic obligation to commend a soul to hell that is deserving of hell if He chooses to grant Mercy as a favor to somone who loved that sinner. This is part of what we Catholics pray in the Divine Mercy Chaplet and do so particularly for you Protestants who are often times living in mortal sin and do not know that a simple “I believe” sola fide faith is sufficient to gain salvation nor is it sufficient to repent and be forgiven of sins. Is is because God takes an eternal right to show mercy to whom He shall that some of you Protestants living in a gravely deficient faith and believing in the lies of the reformers will be saved. Catholics pray for Divine Mercy for non-Catholics daily and this we entrust to God’s Mercy since we know most of you are clueless that you MUST ask forgivness of sins and be repentant. On the other hand if a person who is in grave sin has no one to pray for them God is under no compulsion to grant them mercy since they did not use their life either to accept God nor to win friends who might pray for them out of charity and love.

Man does have substantial freedom of will and we see this in the extremes that man goes to commit mass murder (Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Attila the Hun etc.) with God permitting it and not intervening to stop it. How can this be? It is because as atrocious as these abuses of free will are they are already foreseen by God and knit into Divine Providence to represent each man’s personal choices (good and bad) . None of these things can chance a single iota of the final outcome of Divine Plan since our choices are part of that plan as God saw them to be made. That is, God is not a bully and a dictator who will force his will on us. He wants us to participate in our own destiny and to choose our own destiny and makes it possible for each of us to determine our own destiny without prejudice for us rejecting Him or not. But again, noting any man can do through free will will change what God has ordained to be His purpose in letting Divine Providence to play out since He desires to prove that a greater good comes out of man’s disobedience in falling with His grace saving those who elected to choose Him over evil.

God wants all to come to him but He will honor the choice of those who reject Him and let them choose Satan over Himself if that is what others want. Every soul that goes to hell will be made to confess “I am damned by my own fault and choice” since to commit grave sin requires a conscious consent of will.

God’s will is for us to choose Him and to use our precious gift of life and free will to love either Him or Satan and the created creatures. God wants no one who will not love Him for His own sake out of love and not out of fear of punishment. God does not want robots in heaven but lovers of free assent.

James

 

[holy_moly]

It depends on you if you stray away from him!
If you accept him as your savior but strayed away, its called Back Sliding
You can still go back to his path but it will be hard…
Even God gets tired forgiving…

I thought Jesus said to forgive 7 x 70

 

[Tanner9188]

Easy believism is a person who practices the neo-Christian philosophies of the last few hundred years that are usually associated with most Protestant beliefs. EDITED_SPACE It is a philosophy that actually avoids works in many cases and even sees good works as evil. Which is absurd of course.

You watch too much TV evangelism and get it confused with the “fundementalists”. The cults you mentioned below are the folks that rejected fundamentalism and became apostates. 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. I do not know a true fundamentalist that fits your description above and hope I don’t unless God has prepared their heart to hear His truth. In fact I never met a fundamentalist, that did not come first with a heart of repentance before making a profession; now I’m sure there are some tares or apostates here and there that did not have a real heart of repentance. God either forgives all or none; He is black and white in that manner. He either saved one from sin and death or He didn’t. It is not the issue of works that is the real issue; it is the intent of the heart. If one does a Sacrament in hope to find favor by cooperating with God, then this is a graceless work. If I donate money to feed the poor because I hope God will look down upon me and smile; that is a graceless work. If I give to the poor because I have a love for God; knowing how much He gave for me, then my heart is in the right place and I honor and glorify Him.
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.

You need to stop seeing rituals and traditions as if they are sins. Jesus believed in rituals. He was circumcised. He washed the apostles feet. He had a habit of going to the synagogue on the Sabbath and read the OT and taught. He celebrated the passover meal and asked us to do that in memory of Him using His Body and Blood. The Apostles taught repentance and baptism and evangelized. The apostoles maintained the tradition of breaking bread etc. Note that ther was no tradition of protest in the early church. That is a new work of the devil.

**Rituals and traditions can be benficial and help each other grow in unity, but two things must be present 1) the tradition must be deemed Biblical or in accord with what the Bible teaches as not to violate or add to Gods Word as the Jews did and 2) the intention of the heart; is it out of reverence and love or is it because you believe it will gain grace or blessing from God. 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. 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. **

But you have an erroneous belief that Catholics seem to think that we believe that rituals and traditions make one in good standing with God. This is not true. We believe that one is in good standing with God after initial repentance and baptism - just as the apostles did (unless you are calling that a ritual???). But one needs to maintain their state of grace by avoiding sin and if sinning gravely one must repent and confess those sins just like was done in the early church. Do you call repentance and confession a ritual?

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; but I go directly the the one and only High Priest, which is Jesus. For He alone is able to forgive sins and although I already know my sins were forgiven; I go out of love, reverence and respect for His holiness.You said: ‘one needs to maintain a state of grace’, what does this mean to you? We may agree somewhat on this one; the difference is that you may be taught “saving” grace as opposed the grace gives us to do the works He prepared, that we would honor Him outwardly.

CONTINUED

 

[Tanner9188]

You must not read your bible since there are various accounts of healing the sick, people confessing their sins and breaking bread. God gives repentant grace to all men and it is up to us to respond to it since it is resistible. Are you trying to tell us that you are a mindless robot to grace and are not responsbile for your own behavior!!! This is the kind of thinking that leads to fundamentalists like Jim Jones and David Koresh and abortion doctor shooters killing people or committing suicide. Please don’t tell me you believe this nonsence that you have no free will to accept or reject grace!!! The proper Christian teaching is that we get a new nature at baptism and a life long sanctification process starts. MORE EDIT

The apostolic teaching is at the point one believes in His heart that Jesus was raised from the dead; he receives the baptism of the Holy Spirit and is sealed. At that point the sanctification, wrought 100% by God, begins and one of the first acts of obedience is water baptism. You seem to see one baptism in the Scripture, yet John’s was unique, Christ’s was a one time uniqueness to Himself, and John said that Jesus would come and baptize with the spirit and with fire, so there are two more with the Spirit baptism being the seal or guarantee to the called. The baptismof fire is probable the second coming judgment.

EDITED FOR space
James

 

[holy_moly]

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…

With this comment tanner, you lose all credibility, even as an anti-Catholic. How can you be so disrespectful of those that actually had direct experience w/ the Apostles? And as usual, you give no specifics to back up your vitriol. The rest of your post goes downhill so fast it barely dignifies a response…

I don’t see much of Christ in its historical past.

Blaming the Church for the sins of some of its members, how mature. How about returning the favor & blaming Jesus for choosing Judas?

… but I don’t need a Priest that has no power to forgive sins and is not Biblically defined either;

Christ chose men in place of himself, to carry on his ministry. (Jn 20:21) “As the Father has sent me, so I send you… those whose sins you forgive/retain are forgiven/retained.” In Mt 18, Jesus tells ‘men’, “Whatever you bind & loose on earth, so it is in heaven.” In 2 Cor 5 Paul explains, “All this has been done by God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ & has given us the ministry of reconciliation.“ Obviously, Jesus has given authority to his apostles to carry on a ministry of reconciliation, to either forgive or not. This is also affirmed in Luke (10:16) “He who hears you, hears me. He who rejects you, rejects me. And he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.” We are to confess our sins to one another (James 5:16). Do you still maintain that the power to forgive/retain is not Biblical tanner?

 

[CentralFLJames]

You watch too much TV evangelism and get it confused with the “fundementalists”. The cults you mentioned below are the folks that rejected fundamentalism and became apostates.

Actually I have not watched TV for over 2 years since its all commercials and mindless fluff and secularized social programming and mind-control. So that blows that speculation all up. With over 40,000+ word wide protestants sects to choose from I am sure you would have quite a collection of fellow Protestants to point to as the one’s who are apostates and which ones are really saved. So this is dead end discussion as far as I am concerned. From a Catholic perspective all of them are apostates for choosing to join ecclesial clubs that have no apostolic priesthood and have no authority to be teaching God’s Word and propagating a new gospel never before taught in all of Christendom till a few hundred years ago. I’d still like you to point to some historical evidence of a single Christian city or church or state before the 1400’s who taught sola scriptura and sola fide or any of the other solas. I know you can’t since no one ever taught this neo-Christianity.

It is not the issue of works that is the real issue; it is the intent of the heart. If one does a Sacrament in hope to find favor by cooperating with God, then this is a graceless work. If I donate money to feed the poor because I hope God will look down upon me and smile; that is a graceless work. If I give to the poor because I have a love for God; knowing how much He gave for me, then my heart is in the right place and I honor and glorify Him.

Good. So you are not against works and recognize that there are valid and necessary spiritual works that God gives those who are being sanctified by Him? This is Catholic Teaching and we do make a distinction because if one is not in a state of grace one can not do any good work for God no matter how well intending to please God. But you are too restrictive on your saying that if one does a work for God with the hope of pleasing Him that this invalidates the work. That is just as silly as saying you’d spank your young child for making up his room and cleaning out the garage for his daddy since he wanted to make his father happy and proud of him. Our relationship with God is just as a father and we can be sure that God loves any good deed done with the idea of winning his approval and making him happy. If we expect to be paid for it though - well that is a different matter except we know that God always pays his debts. So even the man not devoted to God can possibly gain some temporal benefits if he donates to charity or desires to do good for a reward - God may grant longer life, or he may ostensibly receive “good luck” in this world - but it will not merit him any grace for the next world but God might indeed give more repentant grace to help him decide to convert etc. I can’t tell you how many times I have seen very secular men who do not ostensibly believe in God do good things for the community out of a true desire to help Christians or the community at large who over time “fall in love with God’s people” and convert. God settles his accounts - both temporal and eternal. Don’t confuse the two though.

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 things are not in Scripture.

But here you are just showing your ignorance of what Catholic believe and are just mindlessly spewing anti-Catholic polemics that some ignorant dirt-clod taugh you.

Sanctifying Grace is a gift from God. We get our first gift at baptism which is the seed of new life that God plants in us. Over time this seed properly nourished with prayer, worship of God (especially in the Eucharist) grows and intensifies. We gain more grace as we grow and are disposed to receive more grace - maturing in the faith. Works of grace are a natural fruit of growth that God gives for His purposes (bringing others to Himself, helping His people etc.) and we in turn gain more grace for more good works of grace so we can produce ever more good fruits. This metaphor of the bearing good fruit and good works is all through scripture and if you don’t see that then you are as the cursed fig tree that would not bear fruit except for when it wanted to (in natural season instead of producing fruit to serve God all the time). Do you read scripture? Really?

Rituals and traditions can be benficial and help each other grow in unity, but two things must be present 1) the tradition must be deemed Biblical or in accord with what the Bible teaches as not to violate or add to Gods Word as the Jews did and 2) the intention of the heart; is it out of reverence and love or is it because you believe it will gain grace or blessing from God.

Can you show me in the bible were it lists these 2 conditions are are you just making up a new religion here on the fly? Sacraments are for the benefit of God’s people and while unity of God’s people with themselves and with God is one aspect of it the benefit is that individuals each gain grace that is THEIRS and THEIRS ALONE - each in accordance with one’s own disposition to receive grace. Christianity is not some kind of socialism or equal-grace system that holds back grace from those who are ready to advance so that “no child is left behind” (no matter how disobedient and sinful). Nope - Christianity is not founded on a least common denominator system and lets those that want to soar have the liberty to be all they can be - for greater service to God and His people. The greatest among us serves the least out of desire to elevate God’s people and advance God’s kingdom. Thus Christianity is the ultimate expression of freedom man can ever ascend to.

[cont]

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

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.

I’ll be frank here - your contempt for the early Church fathers shows the true state of your heart. THIS IS THE EARLY CHURCH and the very people Jesus died for! If you can’t identify with the early church then you have no linkage to Christianity and are in a false Christianity since there is NO OTHER CHURCH on the planet that is Christian. Where do you imagine that you graft into the Body of Christ if not through the early church??? I can assure you that every single Christian Bishop of the early church would find your opinions repugnant to the true apostolic teaching and if you expressed to them what you do to us you would be thrown out of church and prevented from being part of the assembly of worshippers and denied entrance to break bread with the fellowship.

As for anti-Jewish sentiment - are you sure you are not confusing the USA’s deep south protestant KKK church movement of the 19th and latter century in your history?

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; but I go directly the the one and only High Priest, which is Jesus. For He alone is able to forgive sins and although I already know my sins were forgiven;

You need to go back and re-read your bible Tanner because you don’t know what you are talking about. Sorry to be so blunt. We are told explicitly that the apostles and their successors have the power to forgive sins and no one else in the bible is given this authority and no verse tells us that we can go directly to God and assume we are forgiven.

John 20:21 - before He grants them the authority to forgive sins, Jesus says to the apostles, “as the Father sent me, so I send you.” As Christ was sent by the Father to forgive sins, so Christ sends the apostles and their successors forgive sins.

John 20:22 - the Lord “breathes” on the apostles, and then gives them the power to forgive and retain sins. The only other moment in Scripture where God breathes on man is in Gen. 2:7, when the Lord “breathes” divine life into man. When this happens, a significant transformation takes place.

John 20:23 - Jesus says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven. If you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” In order for the apostles to exercise this gift of forgiving sins, the penitents must orally confess their sins to them because the apostles are not mind readers. The text makes this very clear.

More Here: scripturecatholic.com/confession.html

You said: ‘one needs to maintain a state of grace’, what does this mean to you? We may agree somewhat on this one; the difference is that you may be taught “saving” grace as opposed the grace gives us to do the works He prepared, that we would honor Him outwardly.

That means avoiding sin and if falling into sin then repenting and going as soon as possible to the sacrament of confession to be forgiven and receiving the eucharist - the Bread of Life which helps heal us from our proclivities to repeat forgiven sins and strengthens us spiritually.

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

The apostolic teaching is at the point one believes in His heart that Jesus was raised from the dead; he receives the baptism of the Holy Spirit and is sealed. At that point the sanctification, wrought 100% by God, begins and one of the first acts of obedience is water baptism. You seem to see one baptism in the Scripture, yet John’s was unique, Christ’s was a one time uniqueness to Himself, and John said that Jesus would come and baptize with the spirit and with fire, so there are two more with the Spirit baptism being the seal or guarantee to the called. The baptismof fire is probable the second coming judgment.

While it is correct that God works through the Holy Spirit by using what we call actual grace to turn the human heart toward him and begin repenting before baptism it is not true that one receives the Holy Spirit before baptism. This is not the normative means and is not the apostolic teaching that we have handed down to us. The case of Cornelius’ accounts with the Holy Spirit coming before baptism was an extraordinary event meant as a sign to Peter and his disciples that baptism was permitted to be extended to the Gentiles (btw - proof of Peter’s supremacy to make important decisions like this for the entire Church). The Holy Spirit will not take residence in a soul that is still corrupt in the stain of original sin and other personal grave sins. Baptism calls down sanctifying grace won on the cross of redemption through the channel of Christ’s Church to purify the soul of all sin - both original sin and personal sin. At that instant the soul is radically reconfigured from a human natural soul to a divine-human soul formed after Christ’s very own soul and is marked (sealed) as “Christian”. The Holy Spirit then immediately takes residence and starts a life long process of sanctifying the soul and growing it in holiness and accumulates progressively more sanctifying grace as the soul grows in spiritual capacity (maturity).

John’s baptism was not a christian baptism but a preparatory baptism of repentance to prepare for Christ’s. Christ entered the waters to sanctify the water by His Holy Presence for all Christian baptisms henceforth after his resurrection. Besides water baptism there are two other kinds of equivalent Christian baptisms - one called “by desire” (the good thief had this - for those who can not obtain a water baptism due to circumstances) and the one baptism by blood (a martyr’s baptism like the Holy Innocents received - the children murdered by King Herod who tried to kill the Christ child). There is a final last polishing act at death where one is purified of not only of the scars and temporal debts of all forgiven sins but also the appetite to repeat these sins (what we call concupiscence) in the refining fires of purgatory. Some saints are so holy that they escape this final purification and the pangs of death are sufficient to finish their sanctification so they are received directly into heaven and crowned in glory.

Those who are in grave unrepented sins who believe that they do not need to confess their sins, even if baptised, when confronted by the holiness of God immediately jump into hell to escape the shame of their unforgiven sins. Lacking any ability to be forgiven these can never again rise to heaven and are doomed by their own prideful hearts to suffer spiritual torment and separation from glory forever.

James

 

[Tanner9188]

With this comment tanner, you lose all credibility, even as an anti-Catholic. How can you be so disrespectful of those that actually had direct experience w/ the Apostles? And as usual, you give no specifics to back up your vitriol. The rest of your post goes downhill so fast it barely dignifies a response…

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.

Blaming the Church for the sins of some of its members, how mature. How about returning the favor & blaming Jesus for choosing Judas?

Jesus did choose Judas. He is an example of the ultimate apostate and a serious study on the Life of Judas and what made him an apostate could be a real awakening for some.

Christ chose men in place of himself, to carry on his ministry. (Jn 20:21) “As the Father has sent me, so I send you… those whose sins you forgive/retain are forgiven/retained.” In Mt 18, Jesus tells ‘men’, “Whatever you bind & loose on earth, so it is in heaven.” In 2 Cor 5 Paul explains, “All this has been done by God, who has reconciled us to himself through Christ & has given us the ministry of reconciliation.“ Obviously, Jesus has given authority to his apostles to carry on a ministry of reconciliation, to either forgive or not. This is also affirmed in Luke (10:16) “He who hears you, hears me. He who rejects you, rejects me. And he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me.” We are to confess our sins to one another (James 5:16). Do you still maintain that the power to forgive/retain is not Biblical tanner?

**Christ also banished the necessity for a levitical style priesthood. He became the High Priest for the royal priesthood; might be why we are told not to call anyone our spiritual father on earth or teacher or rabi and why we are told to go directly to the Father for communion and forgiveness through prayer and supplication.

Do you have any idea the significance of Christ “sitting” at the right hand of the Father? Do you also understand the the early church fathers referred to “vicar of Christ” as the Holy Spirit, which is true then as it is now; yet the pope has usurped the authority of the Holy Spirit, which is not possible. 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. Do you know you cannot find priest, in reference to an heirachy; except for Jesus as High Priest and believers as the “Royal Priesthood”; no Roman priesthood or even a shadow of it in the NT; but certainly another shadow which looks like a weaker version of the levitical exists.

Study your Bible, Hebrews 9,10 & 11 concerning the priesthood and the entire history of the Church; not just the one sided slant you will get internally.

Do you know that Loosing and binding applies to everyone who is able to present the gospel? Matthew 18. It was an old rabinnical teaching “if you obey the law you sins are forgiven and if you do not obey the law, then you remain in your sin”; the NT vernacular would be “if you accept the gospel, the your sins are forgiven and if you reject the gospel, you remain in your sins” Isn’t that true? Would heaven be in agreement with that?
**

 

[Tanner9188]

While it is correct that God works through the Holy Spirit by using what we call actual grace to turn the human heart toward him and begin repenting before baptism it is not true that one receives the Holy Spirit before baptism. This is not the normative means and is not the apostolic teaching that we have handed down to us. The case of Cornelius’ accounts with the Holy Spirit coming before baptism was an extraordinary event meant as a sign to Peter and his disciples that baptism was permitted to be extended to the Gentiles (btw - proof of Peter’s supremacy to make important decisions like this for the entire Church). The Holy Spirit will not take residence in a soul that is still corrupt in the stain of original sin and other personal grave sins. Baptism calls down sanctifying grace won on the cross of redemption through the channel of Christ’s Church to purify the soul of all sin - both original sin and personal sin. At that instant the soul is radically reconfigured from a human natural soul to a divine-human soul formed after Christ’s very own soul and is marked (sealed) as “Christian”. The Holy Spirit then immediately takes residence and starts a life long process of sanctifying the soul and growing it in holiness and accumulates progressively more sanctifying grace as the soul grows in spiritual capacity (maturity).

**Now, you are imposing on what is clearly taught in Scripture; if water baptism were so necessary for salvation you would see it everywhere that the salvation message is given; yet it is not. Even Paul stated: For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. There is no way Paul would have ever made that statement if baptism by water was a requirement for salvation. At the moment you truly believe in your heart, which only God knows, is the moment one receives the Holy Spirit. There is no record of the disciples being baptized; you would think if it were necessary, then it would be there. We do know they were baptized by the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. There are more places where people believed and were saved w/o water baptism. No apostles taught water baptism was necessary for salvation. Even in Acts 2, you would have to impose on the passage to render it a necessary.
**

John’s baptism was not a christian baptism but a preparatory baptism of repentance to prepare for Christ’s. Christ entered the waters to sanctify the water by His Holy Presence for all Christian baptisms henceforth after his resurrection. Besides water baptism there are two other kinds of equivalent Christian baptisms - one called “by desire” (the good thief had this - for those who can not obtain a water baptism due to circumstances) and the one baptism by blood (a martyr’s baptism like the Holy Innocents received - the children murdered by King Herod who tried to kill the Christ child). There is a final last polishing act at death where one is purified of not only of the scars and temporal debts of all forgiven sins but also the appetite to repeat these sins (what we call concupiscence) in the refining fires of purgatory. Some saints are so holy that they escape this final purification and the pangs of death are sufficient to finish their sanctification so they are received directly into heaven and crowned in glory.

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. Why not look at the ones that are written, the ones I pointed to earlier and just admit the truth. The only saving baptism is the one John said Jesus would bring, which is the Holy Spirit baptism, where when one truly believes he receives and is sealed by the “Spirit of promise”. Why can’t you see what the Scripture actually teaches; are you blinded by what you have been taught to the point where you can rationalize away what is said in Scripture; to whom do you hold you alliance, the Word of God or elsewhere? See the truth of the Word; see it!

Those who are in grave unrepented sins who believe that they do not need to confess their sins, even if baptised, when confronted by the holiness of God immediately jump into hell to escape the shame of their unforgiven sins. Lacking any ability to be forgiven these can never again rise to heaven and are doomed by their own prideful hearts to suffer spiritual torment and separation from glory forever.

James

James, in God’s sight a small lie is as grave as murder and the penalty is the same, which is death. Through one man will all are made sin by nature and by one man, Jesus, few are made righteous (all sins forgiven). Time is passing and no one knows what tomorrow may bring.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Now, you are imposing on what is clearly taught in Scripture; if water baptism were so necessary for salvation you would see it everywhere that the salvation message is given; yet it is not. Even Paul stated: For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. [edit: italicizing scripture to distinguish it from Tanner’s personal words and private interpretation.]

There is no way Paul would have ever made that statement if baptism by water was a requirement for salvation. At the moment you truly believe in your heart, which only God knows, is the moment one receives the Holy Spirit.

We DO see baptism being mentioned all over the NT. Hello???
Here again you are using sophomoric and self-schooled revival-tent level teaching that is devoid of the apostolic teaching traditions to demonstrate how utterly vain it is to believe in the man-made tradition of sola scripture. If you knew what the apostles really taught and did not anachronistically back-project your own neo-Christian personal reading into scripture you would know that Paul was only talking about himself in being called to preach the Word of God and leaving it to others in The Church to baptise. Paul was too valuable as a gospel speaker to spend time baptising thousands every day - his calling was to get out and get the word out as fast and as far as possible and leave the baptising to lesser gifted men. Those hearing Paul’s words were to go absorb what they heard, repent then wait to enter into Christ’s Church - The Catholic Church AFTER being sponsored by somone who could vouch for them.

You have NO understanding of how The Church operated in the early centuries and still does. In the early Church a person had to repent for months and be trained and taught then on Easter Vigil (up to a year away) they were permitted to be baptised. There was none of this revival-tent “I believism hallelujah” altar call instant salvation nonsence going on. No! Once the church started becoming substantial and formed one had to be taught the traditions and the proper understanding of God’s Word and new candidates had to leave the assembly before the breaking of the bread until they were baptised since this sacred rite was not open to those not baptised IN THE CHURCH. If Paul believed as you say then he would certainly not baptized Lydia and her family in Acts 16:15. How do you explain that Tanner? Do you think Paul just had an epiphany one day and said “this baptism stuff is a waste of time”? If Paul did not believe in baptism he would not have converted to become Christian and been baptised himself.

So once again, you again have completely ignored the scripture verses that show us that Paul himself subject himself to the authority of The Church to BE BAPTISED BY WATER before The Church would accept Him as a Christian. This is both an obedience to the authority of The Church (Ananias, the first Bishop of Damascus, represented The Church in Paul’s own baptism) as well as a sacrament that bestows actual grace and an indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Hello Tanner - you need to please STOP projecting your own curious thoughts into what Paul believed and not put new meaning behind his words. Paul did not tolerate that kinds of stuff. He would curse you to your face for teaching a new gospel (ref. Galatians 1:9) and severely chastise you for daring to put YOUR own personal meaning behind HIS words. EVERYTHING Paul says regarding baptism contradicts what you just tried to put into Paul’s mouth. EVERYTHING. Explain these verses and stop making Paul into a liar to bend his words to your new neo-Christian religion:
Acts 9:18 - Paul, even though he was directly chosen by Christ and immediately converted to Christianity, still had to be baptized to be forgiven his sin. This is a powerful text which demonstrates the salvific efficacy of water baptism, even for those who decide to give their lives to Christ.

Acts 22:16 - Ananias tells Paul, "arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins," even though Paul was converted directly by Jesus Christ. This proves that Paul’s acceptance of Jesus as personal Lord and Savior was not enough to be forgiven of his sin and saved. The sacrament of baptism is required.

Acts 22:16 - further, Ananias’ phrase “wash away” comes from the Greek word “apolouo.” “Apolouo” means an actual cleansing which removes sin. It is not a symbolic covering up of sin. Even though Jesus chose Paul directly in a heavenly revelation, Paul had to be baptized to have his sins washed away.

Titus 3:5-6 – Paul writes about the “washing of regeneration,” which is “poured out on us” in reference to water baptism. “Washing” (loutron) generally refers to a ritual washing with water.

Heb. 10:22 – AGAIN, Paul writes about water baptism in this verse. “Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.” Our bodies are washed with pure water in water baptism.

Cor. 6:11 - Paul says they were washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, in reference to baptism. The “washing” of baptism gives birth to sanctification and justification, which proves baptism is not just symbolic.

Acts 16:15 - Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word “household” comes from the Greek word “oikos” which is a household that includes infants and children.
Are you really really sure you are saved bro? You really need to stop trying to teach scripture here with Catholics. We have the true apostolic teaching that has been handed down for 2,000 years and we know the real thing when we hear it and what you are saying is not even in the ball park of Christianity. Sorry…

[continued]

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

[from prior]

There is no record of the disciples being baptized; you would think if it were necessary, then it would be there. We do know they were baptized by the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. There are more places where people believed and were saved w/o water baptism. No apostles taught water baptism was necessary for salvation. Even in Acts 2, you would have to impose on the passage to render it a necessary.

No records??? Acts 22:16 EXPLICITLY tells us that Paul an Apostle was baptized!
Just because The bible does not mention every detail of ever other apostle is irrelevant. Why would you expect a complete record when the bible itself tells us it is NOT a complete record of all that Christ and the apostles did??? Again, do you not read your bible (ref. John 21:25)???

The early church Father, Clement of Alexandria (AD 190) told us that Christ baptized Peter alone, and Peter then baptized Andrew, and Andrew John, and they James and the rest. You need to start using some common sense and reason when you read your bible and reading some early church history.

The Holy Spirit was not available for mankind until Pentecost just as Jesus promised and why Jesus elected to return to the Father and not stay on Earth so more grace would come to more men and more would be saved.

**These are Romish invention and not supported by Scripture, “baptism by desire” Oh my God! 'a marty[ers]'s baptism" another Roman Church invention not found in all of Scripture.
**
How odd that you show the peculiar Protestant attitude of playing hop-scotch once you’re your beliefs are challenged and collapse. You have just gone from a position of saying one does not need a water baptism to now laughing at those who say the same thing. My my what a funny and strange world you live in Tanner…

This particular truth comes out of theological insight – but its not the normative way. God is not limited to the sacraments for those who hear his call and can’t get to a church due to circumstances (eg. Being born in a Muslim country and having come to believe in Christ through reading and desiring to become Christian – but dieing before they are baptized). But at the same time God does not respect a person who does not respect His Church.
Tanner9188;5496992:

Why not look at the ones that are written, the ones I pointed to earlier and just admit the truth.

Because I have already refuted all of them and you have not responded to the dozens of scripture verses that refute your silly claims.

James, in God’s sight a small lie is as grave as murder and the penalty is the same, which is death. Through one man will all are made sin by nature and by one man, Jesus, few are made righteous (all sins forgiven). Time is passing and no one knows what tomorrow may bring.

Book, chapter and verse please that tells us small venial sins are as bad as murder? Where do you come up with this stuff Tanner? Scripture calls you a liar but because you are ignorant of the truth you are not going to go to hell just for that (but if you spread your contempt for Christ’s Church, the Catholic Church, you very well could go to hell for that.

2 classes of sin – those that are grave/mortal and those that are small/venial:

*1 John 5:16-17; Luke 12:47-48 - there is a distinction between mortal and venial sins. This has been the teaching of the Catholic Church for 2,000 years, but, today, most Protestants no longer agree that there is such a distinction. Mortal sins lead to death and must be absolved in the sacrament of reconciliation. Venial sins do not have to be confessed to a priest, but the pious Catholic practice is to do so in order to advance in our journey to holiness.

Matt. 5:19 - Jesus teaches that breaking the least of commandments is venial sin (the person is still saved but is least in the kingdom), versus mortal sin (the person is not saved). *

James

 

[CentralFLJames]

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.

Do you really want to pretend you know anything of the real history of the Catholic Church to judge the behaviors? Can you point to a single church teaching that ever promoted evil or are you confusing a relatively few bad church clergy over the 2,000 years as representative of the whole Church? Do you really know your history? Do you have any idea of the atrocities and murder committed against the Church? Do you have a clue what Protestants did to themselves? Do you know John Calvin’s persecution of rivals and his cruelty? Do you know of Luther’s ordering the murder and slaughter of the peasants that supported him as he changed sides to back the money and power of the German nobility like a traitor and how he was paid off and given his catholic monastery as his new private home as a wedding gift to his ex-nun wife? Do you have even a clue who saved the west from being over run by the Muslims while Luther and the reformers were fighting the church from the inside as the Muslims were attacking Christendom from the outside? If not for the Catholic Church you would not be here today or would be bowing to Mecca in daily prayers.

Christ also banished the necessity for a levitical style priesthood. He became the High Priest for the royal priesthood; might be why we are told not to call anyone our spiritual father on earth or teacher or rabi and why we are told to go directly to the Father for communion and forgiveness through prayer and supplication.

Call no man father is it? OMG - you got to be kidding. This was a literary style of expression called hyperbole to get people’s attention. If you knew of how many dozens of other scripture rebut that let me mention a few and point you to them:

Acts 7:2; 22:1,1 John 2:13 - elders of the Church are called “fathers.” Therefore, we should ask the question, "Why don’t Protestants call their pastors “father?”

1 Cor. 4:15 - Paul writes, “I became your father in Christ Jesus.”
Philemon 10 - Paul says he has become the “father” of Onesimus.

Heb. 12:7,9 - emphasizes our earthly “fathers.” But these are not just biological but also spiritual (the priests of the Church).

1 Peter 5:13 - Peter refers to himself as father by calling Mark his “son.”

1 John 2:1,13,14 - John calls the elders of the Church “fathers.”

scripturecatholic.com/the_priesthood.html#priesthood-I

Do you have any idea the significance of Christ “sitting” at the right hand of the Father? Do you also understand the the early church fathers referred to “vicar of Christ” as the Holy Spirit, which is true then as it is now; yet the pope has usurped the authority of the Holy Spirit, which is not possible. 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. Do you know you cannot find priest, in reference to an heirachy; except for Jesus as High Priest and believers as the “Royal Priesthood”; no Roman priesthood or even a shadow of it in the NT; but certainly another shadow which looks like a weaker version of the levitical exists.

The right hand of the father is a place of highest honor.

The Vicar of Christ has always referred to the Chair of Peter - a divine authority. The pope speaks with an EQUAL authority of Christ when he speaks on matters of faith and morals. It is Protestants that buck that authority to their eternal consequences.

The authority to forgive sins is uniquely an apostolic successor authority. If you presume upon God’s mercy you commit a very grave sin. More here: scripturecatholic.com/confession.html

James