How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[MariaG]

No, Christ is the head of the church, we are His body. We trust in the head, He is the vine and we are the branches. The branches abide in the vine or it dies.

Joh 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.

He is NOT the church. He is the head, we are the body. He is in charge, not us. The church can do nothing without Him. We place our faith and hope in Him alone.

Why then does the New Testament say that Our Lord is the head of the same body that we are?

Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he may hold the primacy:
…
24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church:

Ok, sorry. Yes there is alot going on here for me. Yes, we must abide in Jesus Christ to have eternal life. The church abides in Christ Jesus, therefore it is Christ that saves, not the church.

I certainly understand how you interpret scripture on this point. The point I was trying to make, and Church Militant did so well with the scripture, is that Catholic Christians, do not interpret scripture the same way you do.

And so when a Catholic Christian says, I trust in the Church, since we interpret scripture, as per Jesus own words from heaven (why are you persecuting me, referring to the Church), Christ is the Church.

Disagree with that interpretation. That is okay. But understand that for a Catholic Christian,

Trust in Jesus = Trust in the Church

Because Christ is the Church according to our interpretation of scripture.

I remember having a conversation with a cradle Catholic. When asked your very same question, she said. “The Church”. When I questioned her further, and clarified, and said, “Of course I mean trust in Christ”. Some can answer your question with the Church and not need any saving from anything since they are firmly in God’s hands.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not here to condemn catholics, If you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and believe that He died on the cross and rose from the dead and confess Him as your Lord and Savior, you are my brother in Christ, no matter which denomination you attend. I know that I have many catholic brothers and sisters, but it wasn’t any particular denomination that saved them, that is my point. It was Jesus Christ.

Great But now I hope you understand when Catholics say “the Church” they are not thinking the same thing you are

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Why is it hard to believe that God infallibly used men to write His book and God continues to use men infallibly when it comes to proclaiming the truth through the Universal Catholic Church?

So when did the Protestant churches come along? We have lineage to St. Peter on whom Christ founded the Church with the rest of the Apostles. We can trace the Catholic Church, how about yours? We can verify that the things we believe in TODAY were taught almost 2000 years ago. Your understanding of “forgivness of sins” doesn’t include confession now does it? Ours does, John 20:22-23, we have records of this being taught by the Early Church Fathers. You?

Baptists have lineage going back to the first church as well. Read “The trail of blood” by Jim Carroll

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

God spoke through them as they were filled with the Holy Ghost. When God speaks through us, He also, in my opinion, seems to take on the personality of the writer.

This is what I mean:

2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Well, which is it. Does God do the writing using the hand of man, or does He inspire men to do the writing and ensuring its content is inerrant? You can’t have it both ways.

 

[MariaG]

Baptists have lineage going back to the first church as well. Read “The trail of blood” by Jim Carroll

Why don’t you research for yourself what scholars, Protestant ones to boot, say about that book?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Baptists have lineage going back to the first church as well. Read “The trail of blood” by Jim Carroll

The only people on the planet who give Carroll’s work any semblance of credibility are “Baptists in Perpetuity”. Not even all Baptist subscribe to the theory of perpetuity. In fact, most Baptist subscribe to the Separatist theory of Baptist origins presented by William Roscoe Estep.

 

[mercygate]

Baptists have lineage going back to the first church as well. Read “The trail of blood” by Jim Carroll

Baptists I know cringe over *The Trail of Blood. *The position as absolutely untenable.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Wait, what? I’ve read the Bible cover-to-cover and never seen the phrase “age of accountability.” Exactly where is the “age of accountability”? Chapter and verse, please. If there’s an “age of accountability” then surely God put it in the Bible for all to see, right? What age is it? 4? 7? 18? 21?

What about original sin? Every baby is conceived with original sin, right? So how is a baby forgiven for original sin? It’s not by faith, right? And according to you it isn’t by baptism, so then what cleanses a baby of original sin?

I am not dogmatic about this issue because frankly, I don’t know. But I know one thing, there is NO place in the entire bible telling you to baptize a baby. That is for believers alone. Not one baby in the bible has been baptized simply because it was a baby.

Do a search study on the topic. According to one guy, it’s 20. Check this site out, but don’t necessarily take it as MY viewpoint.

geocities.com/christian_crusade/theageofaccountability.html

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

No one knows for sure what the age of accountability is? Why would God do that to us?! Why wouldn’t He put that in Scripture for us? We risk our children’s eternal souls, then, if we delay their exposure to and acceptance of the gospel! If only we could seal them with the sign of the New Covenant shortly after their birth…

As for 2 Samuel 12:23, I had never heard that verse interpreted in such a way. I read it and see David acknowledging that nothing he can do will bring his son back from the dead – David was not aware of even the possibility of resurrection, it seems – and that “go to him” does not mean “go to him [after I die]” but physically “go to where his body lies”.

Why didn’t David think the spirit of his son might return, as Samuel’s did? I wonder if David knew of anything after death except for “Sheol”.

David went to paradise when he died because he was a follower of the Lord. This verse seems to indicate that the baby was there and that david was saying “I shall go to him” (after he dies)

 

[HailMary]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2646184&postcount=438

I can’t let you forget about this, since you established that the verse in Romans 13:11 is not about the “redemption of the body”, what else are you left with? Perhaps a more Catholic view?

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

The bible is the Catholic churches “History” :yup: You trust it alright!

No it’s not. It is God’s history written through His prophets. The old testiment was written before the church and the rest of the bible was written before there were denominations, including catholic.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Sorry…Should have been more clear…I know Baptism means fully emersed…I meant the part that reads “Head in water (represents His death, burial) head back out of the water (represents His resurrection)” where did this interpretation come from.

Ro 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

So…Frodo…since you reject the scriptural sacrament of confession, you are asserting that even without confessing that murder that this person still is welcomed into the Kingdom of God?

That’s not scriptural…

I fully believe in confession. Confession TO GOD ALONE for your sins. God is able to forgive all sins and all unrighteousness.

1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

[Tomster]

Frodo,

Maria G said it: “Christ IS the Church.”

In case you did not read my PM, I’ll say it again for you.

The “faith that was handed down, once for all, to the saints” (Jude:7) was never, prior to the 16th century, conceived of as a mass of heterogeneous beliefs from which men could pick and choose according to their inclinations. It was an authoritative pattern of teaching, a “form of doctrine,” to which, as St. Paul reminded the Romans, the faithful had submitted themselves in obedience “from the heart.” (Romans 6:17) The earliest believers were required, not to receive such of the Christian message as seemed to them most reasonable, but to concur in the “sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ” AND IN “that doctrine which is according to godliness.” (1 Timothy 6:3) Nothing could be more explicit than the following declaration in the second Johannine Epistle: “Whosoever revolts and continues not in the doctrine of Christ has not God.” (2 John 9) There is, from the beginning, a definite “confession” of faith to which we must “hold fast.” (Hebrews 4:14) That this early apostolic confession was believed to be backed and supported by God’s truth is clear from the words of our Lord himself: “I have still many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he shall guide you into all truth.” (John 16:12-13) It is in the light of this assurance that we find the primitive Christian community speaking of itself as “the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” (1 Timothy 3:15)

Tomster

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I fully believe in confession. Confession TO GOD ALONE for your sins. God is able to forgive all sins and all unrighteousness.

1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

So much for St. Paul writing about the Apostles being “ministers of reconciliation”. Leaves me to wonder who to trust, the direct words of Scripture, or your interpretation of them.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

I wonder what will happen on judgement day. I wonder if God will ask us things based on bible chapter and verse and if we “knew the Good Word”.

No, I’m certain He desires us to live the gospel message and that will not happen unless one has a proper understanding in the light of Tradition and Apostolic succession which is found only withing the One, Holy, Catholic Church, not a protestant “interpretation” along with the Grace of God.

What does that mean “to know” Surely to know Christ you must keep His Commands. That is indeed scriptural.

Protestants “choose” themselves and I’ve heard them call themselves Apostles. How can that be that they consider themselves apostles? Christ chooses the Apostles, not us.
So how does a sola-scripture believe interpret John 15:16:
You have not chosen me: but I have chosen you; and have appointed you, that you should go, and should bring forth fruit; and your fruit should remain: that whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you

Where do these protestants get their “authority”!? Oh, I get it, you can just make it “mean” whatever you feel like is convienient for you after “feeling” that God answered your question. No wait, that can’t be, there are thousands of different interpretations and Truth (God, which all authority comes from) can not disagree.
Reason always trumps “feelings”.

I was at the barber today. He knew I was Catholic and started telling me how the Catholic Church should “make changes”.
“What do you mean?” I asked…
He said “Well, priest should not be celibate, that’s not even biblical…”
If that were so why then does Christ say in** Matthew 19:12 **:
For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it.

And then St. Paul in his letter to the Corinthians Chapter 7 (which I will not cut and paste) remarks on how it is good for a man not to touch a woman if he is able (by God’s Grace) to remain chaste/celibate. That is also where the discipline of priestly ceibacy is indeed scriptural.

Protestants don’t know, they just interpret as they please. They are “knowledgable” of scripture, but they do not know scripture because they do not know or accept the True Authority behind it which was instituted by Christ. That is in the end, a rejection of the Holy Ghost.

Hmmm…I’m surprised this thread is still going!
Where is “xfrodobagginsx”??? He hasn’t posted in a while…I wonder if him and that other little hobbit are too busy taking the ring to Mordor…Oh please hurry back Frodo Baggins, Middle Earth is counting on you…

Hmm, let’s see. If the bible is God’s word, that means that it is God’s will. Of course He is going to judge us by His word.

You seem to be trusting in your traditions rather than the word of God:

Mr 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

What do we live by? The word of God, not the church:

Lu 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Lu 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

They didn’t speak the teachings of “The church” They spoke the word of God:

Ac 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.

2Sa 22:31 As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all them that trust in him. {tried: or, refined}

Ps 18:30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.

 

[HailMary]

I fully believe in confession. Confession TO GOD ALONE for your sins. God is able to forgive all sins and all unrighteousness.

1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Then you have a problem…don’t you see it yet?

John 20:22-23
When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

answer me this xfrodobagginsx:
HOW WOULD THE APOSTLES KNOW WHAT SINS TO “FORGIVE” OR “RETAIN” IF THE OTHER PERSONS SINS WERE NOT KNOWN TO THEM? (through confession perhaps?!)

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Frodo,

Maria G said it: “Christ IS the Church.”

In case you did not read my PM, I’ll say it again for you.

The “faith that was handed down, once for all, to the saints” (Jude:7) was never, prior to the 16th century, conceived of as a mass of heterogeneous beliefs from which men could pick and choose according to their inclinations. It was an authoritative pattern of teaching, a “form of doctrine,” to which, as St. Paul reminded the Romans, the faithful had submitted themselves in obedience “from the heart.” (Romans 6:17) The earliest believers were required, not to receive such of the Christian message as seemed to them most reasonable, but to concur in the “sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ” AND IN “that doctrine which is according to godliness.” (1 Timothy 6:3) Nothing could be more explicit than the following declaration in the second Johannine Epistle: “Whosoever revolts and continues not in the doctrine of Christ has not God.” (2 John 9) There is, from the beginning, a definite “confession” of faith to which we must “hold fast.” (Hebrews 4:14) That this early apostolic confession was believed to be backed and supported by God’s truth is clear from the words of our Lord himself: “I have still many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he shall guide you into all truth.” (John 16:12-13) It is in the light of this assurance that we find the primitive Christian community speaking of itself as “the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” (1 Timothy 3:15)

Tomster

That’s not correct. He is not the church. The church is made up of the true believers in Christ. He is the head of the church, but not “the church” We are HIS body, He is the head. He is the MIND of the church, the church obeys HIS word, NOT the churches word.

Who is “The rock” is it peter or Jesus? I say it’s Jesus, my hunch is that you think it’s peter. Jesus built His church upon HIMSELF not peter.

 

[mercygate]

Hmm, let’s see. If the bible is God’s word, that means that it is God’s will. Of course He is going to judge us by His word.

You seem to be trusting in your traditions rather than the word of God:

Mr 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

What do we live by? The word of God, not the church:

Lu 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Lu 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

They didn’t speak the teachings of “The church” They spoke the word of God:

Ac 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.

2Sa 22:31 As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all them that trust in him. {tried: or, refined}

Ps 18:30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.

Although you are fervent, you are quite mistaken in your view that there is any conflict between the “word of God” and the teachings of the Church. You seem to approach Catholic teaching without a clear view of what Catholic teaching really *is. * Nothing in Catholic teaching contradicts Scripture. NOTHING.

You might find it easier on your head to frame your objections as questions rather than as definitive statements. It will save you a lot of embarrassment when you have to say: “I was wrong.”

 

[Tomster]

I fully believe in confession. Confession TO GOD ALONE for your sins. God is able to forgive all sins and all unrighteousness.

1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Frodo,

" ‘As the Father has sent me, I also send you.’ When he had said this he breathed on them, and he said to them, ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain they are retained.’ " (John 20:21-23)

Please interpret.

Tomster

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Then you have a problem…don’t you see it yet?

John 20:22-23
When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

answer me this xfrodobagginsx:
HOW WOULD THE APOSTLES KNOW WHAT SINS TO “FORGIVE” OR “RETAIN” IF THE OTHER PERSONS SINS WERE NOT KNOWN TO THEM? (through confession perhaps?!)

I don’t know but that was given to the apostles, not us or some priest. No where does it say to confess your sins to a sinful man, such as a priest.

It says that there is ONE mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Jesus is the ONE mediator, NOT a priest. Do you believe this verse?

Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

We confess our sins directly to God:

1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
(KJV)