How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[xfrodobagginsx]

I haven’t either. Perhaps he either took the day off or he is sorting through everything or he threw up the white flag.

Tomster

J-Bells Fiancee

I understand your Logic, however Salvation is very important, On that i think we would AGREE, so, if the bible through the Holy Ghost is the key to knowing Christ. Why did Christ specifically Say The Gates of Hell will not prevail agianst my church. He doesn’t say follower,or Scripture or Denomination, he says “My Church” Which to me very clearly means there is one Church and that is God’s Church and The gates of hell will not prevail agianst it. and to me this is the Key to the Kingdom this is the key to finding Salvation. This is the place Christ want for us to abide.

Because God instituted the church, but He didn’t place it above His word. His word endures forever:

Ps 119:89 ¶ LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

Ps 119:160 ¶ Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. {Thy word…: Heb. The beginning of thy word is true}

Isa 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

Ps 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

 

[Church_Militant]

Wow, how do you study without interpreting? I would love to know that. Besides it also says to study to make sure that you are being taught the truth.
Ac 17:11

And this is precisely what I have done…and why I am Catholic.

You are so used to letting some priest think for you that you cannot understand this freedom.

Rhetorical trash talk and wishful thinking on your part. I am a prize example of that…

No, because no one person, or church is perfect incuding the catholic church. We need the Holy Spirit to interpret scripture.

Amen! Catholics believe that 100% However, there is a consistent authority that has dealt with this for 2,000 years and you have a Bible at all (albeit, a version edited by men…) even now because the Catholic Church preserved and protected it.

No one church perfectly interprets scripture and this is seen in the many denominations,

You just shot yourself in the foot. Why should I believe what you preach if you have no faith in the assurance of Christ’s own promises to His church?

including the fact that there are different types of catholics so don’t be hippocritical and say that the protestants don’t agree on everything, well neither do all catholics.

More wishful thinking and misinterpretation of Catholicism. The various rites of the Catholic Church do indeed hold to the same doctrines, they are not “different types of catholics” in the sense that you use the term.

We need to prayerfully seek the Lord when interpreting scripture and He will show us the meanings in His time, not ours.

Yet even so, you have already been shown to be dead wrong several times right here in this discussion. That being the case, does that not disqualify you as a doctrinal interpreter of the Word of God?

If what you teach conflicts with other passages of the Bible and I have shown that it does… what then does that tell you about your interpretation? Do the teachings in question come from the Holy Spirit or from men…namely you?

The easiest to understand is the salvation message in the bible,

yet that is the point of the most division, because the devil is a deciever. he tries to add things to the gospel, such as baptism saves, ect. to trick people from comming to the truth. he also likes to take away from the gospel by tricking folks into thinking that whatever they want to believe is ok. he also attacks the word of God, by attacking it’s truthfulness, accuracy, and even it’s authority…e.g. people who think that the church’es word trumps the word of God Himself. What a lie.I can’t tell from your posts here so far…

As for the rest of that, I would agree. That’s why so very few of the modern post reformation doctrines align with either the Word of God or with the verifiable writings of the early church. The same allegation cannot be proved against the Catholic Church.

The reason that noone had the bible was that the Catholic church destroyed them and wouldn’t allow anyone to see the bible, let alone study it.

Anti-Catholic propaganda not supported by historical facts. Prior to the invention of the printing press in about 1450, how exactly were copies of the Bible made, and who made them?

Did the apostles just bop down to the Jerusalem Kinko’s and have copies made and/or faxed to Rome, Smyrna, Antioch, and all over the world? (Of course not!)

Also, just how many people could actually read any language at all? So… if few people were literate in any language, and the Bible had to be hand copied and then moved by foot or sea to other places…

(Cont’d)

 

[captaincoog]

The reason that noone had the bible was that the Catholic church destroyed them and wouldn’t allow anyone to see the bible, let alone study it. It was a way of controlling the people. Martin luthor was a catholic monk who realized (because he had access to the scripture) that what they were teaching didn’t line up with the word of God and that’s where the protestant reformation came from.

Hey Frodo, why don’t you do some homework for yourself and stop dishing out this Lorraine Boettner-type garbage? Seriously, LB was clueless about the CC at best, or a diabolical liar at worst. I hope the former for his sake.
Your arguments are unfounded and do not have any substance. Go and have a good think about all your reasons for your stance. Or to clarify, have a good think about the arguments that you have taken on board as your own, because they are not original, nor are they factual.

I have been watching this thread and could not stay out of it any longer.

The Catholic Church gave the world the Bible. If it was not for them you would have NOTHING to twist and interpret to your liking. Or to clarify again, you would not have someone elses private twisted interpretation to champion as your own. Again, these false interpretations you hold are not original nor are they correct.Oh, I am sure you are sincere and passionate, but that does not make you right.

By the way, were you once a Catholic yourself?

Just asking. Ex-Catholics need to continually justify themselves, whereas ex-evangelicals who convert to the Catholic Church do not. Once you come into the fullness of the truth, error and falsehood don’t matter, but if you leave the truth to take up a false religion you need to always justify your position. I am speaking from experience. I left the CC in my 20’s and came back in my 30’s. I was an ardent proponent of EXACTLY the same stuff you believe at the moment. But with a lot of work on the subject, and by the grace of God, I discovered the truth of the Catholic faith, and left the errors of well meaning but misguided evangelicals forever.

 

[Lorrie]

Go and have a good think about all your reasons for your stance.

LAUGH! I read this too fast and I thought it said, “Go and have a good drink…” - which isn’t bad advice to give him now that I think about it.

 

[Church_Militant]

It was a way of controlling the people.

Right…yeah… NOT. Whoever taught you this lied to you about the Catholic Church.

Martin luthor was a catholic monk who realized (because he had access to the scripture) that what they were teaching didn’t line up with the word of God and that’s where the protestant reformation came from.

More wishful thinking. Luther was anything but an exemplary translator nor one any thinking Christian would follow.

He deliberately tampered with Romans 3:28 in his German translation and added the word “alone” to support his preconceived theology of Sola Fide when he knew full well that there is no such word in the Greek text of that verse. Still think he’s hot stuff?

He not only removed the 7 Deuterocanonical books from his OT canon, but wanted to remove Esther as well, which has no history of being challenged.

In his New Testament he actually removed 4 books as well, James (no surprise there, he called it “an epistle of straw”!), Hebrews, Revelation, and Jude. Do you really think it’s wise to so idolize a man who took such liberties with the Word of God? I wouldn’t.

Because God instituted the church, but He didn’t place it above His word. His word endures forever: Ps 119:89, Ps 119:160, Isa 40:8 , 1Pe 1:23 , 1Pe 1:25 ,Ps 12:6.

Really? Then what does Paul tell Timothy is “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1st Timothy 3:15) 15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Furthermore, can you show me any passage of the New Testament where Jesus tells us that He came to establish a book or collection of books? What in fact does Our Lord say he came to build? Matthew Chapter 16:18: And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.

I cannot find a single verse where Jesus speaks of building a collection of writings or even authorizing anyone to write anything. If you can, please show me…

The fact is that the church preceded the New Testament (and in fact, even Judaism preceded the OT…). Nowhere is there New Testament support for the Bible being greater authority than the church. Those who believe otherwise hold an unscriptural belief.

Let’s put it this way, if anything a church says contradicts the bible, it is a false teaching.

Okay… I’ll go along with this for the sake of argument, but you have just shot yourself in the foot (again), because the teaching of n-C communities that the Bible is the sole authority for all things Christian is not found in the Word of God. Since that is the case, by your own lights you have to reject all those that hold that conflicting teaching as being false…therefore making those same n-C communities false churches.

The catholics have plenty of them.

More wishful thinking and anti-Catholic propaganda without substance. I personally have studied carefully the Word of God, and both n-C and Catholic teaching and can affirm that your statement is false.

I have indeed seen a great number of such false teachings from the many different communities that seem to like to allege that against my own Catholic faith. No one has so far proved their allegation to me though. Not even close…

In fact…it was just that sort of propaganda that backfired and ultimately brought me home to the Catholic faith. Feel free to read my testimony here.

What a lie. The church is expected to live by the word of God, not by it’s own word.

You need to mind your mouth. That sort of remark violates the Forum Rules which is not a good way to insure your own longevity here with us.:tsktsk:

No one here has said that the church supersedes the Word of God, and that is not what the Catholic Church teaches. This has been explained to you before and you seem to insist on taking it the way you wish it was meant instead of what the Catholic Church actually teaches.

This is best discussed in a separate thread if you like as it will take us far off the topic of salvation.

 

[Church_Militant]

LAUGH! I read this too fast and I thought it said, "Go and have a good drink

…" - which isn’t bad advice to give him now that I think about it. He can’t do that. He’s a Baptist and that’s about a mortal sin to them.

Oh, and you’re right.

 

[Lorrie]

He can’t do that. He’s a Baptist and that’s about a mortal sin to them.

Oh, and you’re right.

Oh, see, I always knew they weren’t allowed to drink around others, but that drinking in the closet was OK?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

The reason that noone had the bible was that the Catholic church destroyed them and wouldn’t allow anyone to see the bible, let alone study it. It was a way of controlling the people. Martin luthor was a catholic monk who realized (because he had access to the scripture) that what they were teaching didn’t line up with the word of God and that’s where the protestant reformation came from.

You MIGHT want to crack open an objective history book, because what you’ve posted is pure fantasy.

 

[Pixie_Dust]

The reason that noone had the bible was that the Catholic church destroyed them and wouldn’t allow anyone to see the bible, let alone study it. It was a way of controlling the people. Martin luthor was a catholic monk who realized (because he had access to the scripture) that what they were teaching didn’t line up with the word of God and that’s where the protestant reformation came from.

What does this fairy tale have to do with how to get to Heaven? If you REALLY want to know the TRUTH about the Catholic Church, stop making such assertions without any support and LISTEN.

YES - the Catholic Church burned Bibles. The Bibles that had PRINTING ERRORS in them - would you like to own a Bible that has Jesus saying, “Let the children first be killed.” (Should read “filled” btw) You might not be here today if someone in your family owned a Bible like that and had decided to take God at His Word.

YES - the Catholic Church chained Bibles - so people who were able to read COULD read them, since most people couldn’t afford one. Back then a Bible cost about what you’d pay for a car today. Do you lock your car? Then you’re just as guilty as the Church, keeping people from stealing your car like that. :tsktsk:

The Catholic Church has always encouraged the faithful to study the Scriptures. Don’t know where you got the impression they did not.

Please please please take some time and read Where We Got the Bible.

 

[Tomster]

No, because no one person, or church is perfect incuding the catholic church. We need the Holy Spirit to interpret scripture. No one church perfectly interprets scripture and this is seen in the many denominations, including the fact that there are different types of catholics so don’t be hippocritical and say that the protestants don’t agree on everything, well neither do all catholics. We need to prayerfully seek the Lord when interpreting scripture and He will show us the meanings in His time, not ours. Many times it will be instantaneous, many times it will take longer, some times it takes years to understand certain things in the bible. The easiest to understand is the salvation message in the bible, yet that is the point of the most division, because the devil is a deciever. he tries to add things to the gospel, such as baptism saves, ect. to trick people from comming to the truth. he also likes to take away from the gospel by tricking folks into thinking that whatever they want to believe is ok. he also attacks the word of God, by attacking it’s truthfulness, accuracy, and even it’s authority…e.g. people who think that the church’es word trumps the word of God Himself. What a lie.

Frodo,

The Protestant founders all denied that Christ had protected the teachings of His Church, and asserted that Scripture was clear. The yellow pages prove that Scripture is not clear, check out all the denominations listed in your local directory. What the Protestant founders claimed amounted to supposing that Christ told the Apostles or others: “Write some books; get copies made; tell the people to figure them out for themselves.” That is totally unthinkable

Actually, the Protestant founders and their followers had no logical right even to appeal to the New Testament. In the first centuries, there were in circulation many “gospels” bearing the names of Apostles: The Gospel of Thomas, of James, of Peter, etc. not to mention many epistles. Many Protestants have searched diligently for a way to know which books are inspired. But it is not enough to say that a book which gives one pious thoughts is inspired - many devotional books do that.

Should one say that: “Only Scripture itself can say in a binding way what authority it claims and has . . . Scripture claims considers itself as revelation.” This proposal is really a fine case of begging the question. It really means : “inspired Scripture says it is inspired.” If so, we must first take for granted that Scripture is inspired and then let Scripture tell us that it is inspired.

Tomster

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

The reason that noone had the bible was that the Catholic church destroyed them and wouldn’t allow anyone to see the bible, let alone study it. It was a way of controlling the people. Martin luthor was a catholic monk who realized (because he had access to the scripture) that what they were teaching didn’t line up with the word of God and that’s where the protestant reformation came from.

Hey, why don’t you read this?

users.binary.net/polycarp/burning.html

 

[Gamera]

The reason that noone had the bible was that the Catholic church destroyed them and wouldn’t allow anyone to see the bible, let alone study it. It was a way of controlling the people. Martin luthor was a catholic monk who realized (because he had access to the scripture) that what they were teaching didn’t line up with the word of God and that’s where the protestant reformation came from.

I’ve read the Bible cover-to-cover. I’ve also read the Catechism of the Catholic Church cover-to-cover. I saw nothing that “didn’t line up.”

My priest encourages us constantly to read the Bible. Suggested daily Bible readings are printed in each week’s bulletin. My wife and I do, in fact, read one chapter of the Bible together every night, and it strengthens our Catholic faith.

Your comments are difficult to understand. Have you read the Bible cover-to-cover? Have you read the CCC or do you just accept somebody else’s conclusion that Catholic doctrine “doesn’t line up with” Scripture? If you personally haven’t read the whole Bible, and I have, then how are you in any position to tell me what it does or doesn’t “line up” with?

 

[Harpazo]

It’s fairly easy to dismiss everything the OP says. He has gone on from one emotion rant to another, without any objective proof of his position. If I had to make the call, I’d say his pastor or church was controlling his beliefs.

I think I’m through with this thread, at least for now. Frodo has been nothing but rude and hateful to everyone here. It’s obvious he either: thinks he’s better than us and wants to get us “saved” OR he’s earnestly seeking the truth, but doesn’t know how to use respect and manners.

Either way, I’m through with this thread for the moment. Someone who wants to “save our souls from Rome” should be a lot more charitable in his approach. But, I digress.

In Pax Christi
Andrew

PS Frodo, you never answered my claim about the Greek, why is that now?

visit: www.scripturecatholic.com to see how Scripture and the Church add up.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

He can’t do that. He’s a Baptist and that’s about a mortal sin to them.

Oh, and you’re right.

Actually, I do drink in moderation. Most catholics can’t say that, they get drunk as can be while saying it’s not a sin to be drink…hiccup! They forget the part where it says not to be DRUNK. Also, why do priests drink when the bible expressely says for a bishop not to drink. A Bishop is the leader of a church according to the bible and the bible says that they CAN marry woman. Why does your church forbid marriage to them?

I think I’ll go get me a corona with lime, no wait, that’s tonight…think I’ll have a coffee. :coffeeread:

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Oh, see, I always knew they weren’t allowed to drink around others, but that drinking in the closet was OK?

I drink around others, but out of respect for some christians who don’t drink, I don’t drink around them. If they ask I will tell them what I feel about drinking. Most southern baptist don’t have a problem with drinking in moderation. It’s the independent ones that do and I don’t belong to that church denomination.,.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Hey Frodo, why don’t you do some homework for yourself and stop dishing out this Lorraine Boettner-type garbage? Seriously, LB was clueless about the CC at best, or a diabolical liar at worst. I hope the former for his sake.
Your arguments are unfounded and do not have any substance. Go and have a good think about all your reasons for your stance. Or to clarify, have a good think about the arguments that you have taken on board as your own, because they are not original, nor are they factual.

I have been watching this thread and could not stay out of it any longer.

The Catholic Church gave the world the Bible. If it was not for them you would have NOTHING to twist and interpret to your liking. Or to clarify again, you would not have someone elses private twisted interpretation to champion as your own. Again, these false interpretations you hold are not original nor are they correct.Oh, I am sure you are sincere and passionate, but that does not make you right.

By the way, were you once a Catholic yourself?

Just asking. Ex-Catholics need to continually justify themselves, whereas ex-evangelicals who convert to the Catholic Church do not. Once you come into the fullness of the truth, error and falsehood don’t matter, but if you leave the truth to take up a false religion you need to always justify your position. I am speaking from experience. I left the CC in my 20’s and came back in my 30’s. I was an ardent proponent of EXACTLY the same stuff you believe at the moment. But with a lot of work on the subject, and by the grace of God, I discovered the truth of the Catholic faith, and left the errors of well meaning but misguided evangelicals forever.

It’s accepted, proven, common history. Study the history of the protestant reformation, BTW, baptist didn’t come out of the catholic church, we existed along with them although underground and persecuted by catholics.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Right…yeah… NOT. Whoever taught you this lied to you about the Catholic Church.More wishful thinking. Luther was anything but an exemplary translator nor one any thinking Christian would follow.

He deliberately tampered with Romans 3:28 in his German translation and added the word “alone” to support his preconceived theology of Sola Fide when he knew full well that there is no such word in the Greek text of that verse. Still think he’s hot stuff?

He not only removed the 7 Deuterocanonical books from his OT canon, but wanted to remove Esther as well, which has no history of being challenged.

In his New Testament he actually removed 4 books as well, James (no surprise there, he called it “an epistle of straw”!), Hebrews, Revelation, and Jude. Do you really think it’s wise to so idolize a man who took such liberties with the Word of God? I wouldn’t.Really? Then what does Paul tell Timothy is “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1st Timothy 3:15) 15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Furthermore, can you show me any passage of the New Testament where Jesus tells us that He came to establish a book or collection of books? What in fact does Our Lord say he came to build? Matthew Chapter 16:18: And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.

I cannot find a single verse where Jesus speaks of building a collection of writings or even authorizing anyone to write anything. If you can, please show me…

The fact is that the church preceded the New Testament (and in fact, even Judaism preceded the OT…). Nowhere is there New Testament support for the Bible being greater authority than the church. Those who believe otherwise hold an unscriptural belief.
Okay… I’ll go along with this for the sake of argument, but you have just shot yourself in the foot (again), because the teaching of n-C communities that the Bible is the sole authority for all things Christian is not found in the Word of God. Since that is the case, by your own lights you have to reject all those that hold that conflicting teaching as being false…therefore making those same n-C communities false churches. More wishful thinking and anti-Catholic propaganda without substance. I personally have studied carefully the Word of God, and both n-C and Catholic teaching and can affirm that your statement is false.

I have indeed seen a great number of such false teachings from the many different communities that seem to like to allege that against my own Catholic faith. No one has so far proved their allegation to me though. Not even close…

In fact…it was just that sort of propaganda that backfired and ultimately brought me home to the Catholic faith. Feel free to read my testimony here.You need to mind your mouth. That sort of remark violates the Forum Rules which is not a good way to insure your own longevity here with us.:tsktsk:

No one here has said that the church supersedes the Word of God, and that is not what the Catholic Church teaches. This has been explained to you before and you seem to insist on taking it the way you wish it was meant instead of what the Catholic Church actually teaches.

This is best discussed in a separate thread if you like as it will take us far off the topic of salvation.

Wow, you don’t believe the bible is God’s word? I am astounded!! You place your faith in your church?!!! I am astounded!!!

The old testiment is a collection of books, yet Jesus called it the word of God. The new testiment writers called the new testiment the word of God. Were they lying?

God is the center of everything. Christ is the head of the church, the church is His BODY, NOT His mind. Man you are messed up. Yes, Jesus came to build His church, but He didn’t place it over Himself. That’s just plain silly and unfounded.

 

[Philthy]

The only one who can forgive sins is God. If we confess our sins to men, that’s ok, but we still need to confess them to God. He is the only one able to forgive them, because they are against Him. If you sin against your sister, you confess to her and to God ,but if you only confess to her and apologize to her, then you still need to go directly to God for His forgiveness.

This is what is known as equivocating, frodo. You’ll have to look it up. We were supposed to be discussing where your verse says that confession is exclusively to God. Rather than simply and honestly admit that it doesnt say what you wish it said, you continue to squirm into discussions of related, but irrelevent, topics - such as whether God alone forgives sins. “Let your yes be yes and your no be no.” “You shall not …speak falsely to one another”
The fact remains that we have unequivocal statements in Scripture that reveal that the Apostles, aka men, were given the power to forgive sins. And we also know that in order to do so they must have needed to know what those sins were. We have the precedent of the OT atonement where the priest heard the sins of the people, and explicit NT Scripture where we are told to “confess your sins to one another”. We also know that the office of apostle was passed, by human means guided by the holy Spirit, to another man (Matthias). Nowhere in Scripture does it say that the office of Apostle will end. But you persist in your position that “God is the only one we confess to” and “only God can forgive sins” and it reflects poorly on your attempt to witness the faith for the simple reason that it reduces your credibility.

 

[LilyM]

Wow, you don’t believe the bible is God’s word? I am astounded!! You place your faith in your church?!!! I am astounded!!!

The old testiment is a collection of books, yet Jesus called it the word of God. The new testiment writers called the new testiment the word of God. Were they lying?

God is the center of everything. Christ is the head of the church, the church is His BODY, NOT His mind. Man you are messed up. Yes, Jesus came to build His church, but He didn’t place it over Himself. That’s just plain silly and unfounded.

There is ONE Word of God. That word is Jesus. No other words, no matter how divinely inspired, compare. No, not even the Bible. Now Jesus didn’t put the Church over Himself, that is just nonsense and you are nonsensical for interpreting what we’ve said so. But he DID put it right alongside the written scripture. Not inferior to it.

He promised to guide the Apostles into all truth. So yes, they and the Church they founded has been guided into knowing some part (that which is necessary to us) of His mind. He didn’t promise that they would write scriptures at all, let alone that those scriptures would be the sole source of truth.

That which He taught them is not contained within scripture alone. Firstly John says all that He said and taught wasn’t written down. Then too remember most of the Apostles have left no writings, but you can bet they left teachings!

Were they unimportant? Absolutely not. Jesus taught only for three years - ALL of his sayings and doings during that time were important. So were those of the Apostles who passed on His gospel.

How were these unwritten teachings preserved then? Oral tradition. Just as the Old Testament itself was kept for generations as oral tradition.

 

[Gamera]

Actually, I do drink in moderation. Most catholics can’t say that, they get drunk as can be while saying it’s not a sin to be drink…hiccup! They forget the part where it says not to be DRUNK.

Wow, how is this not bigotry? I don’t think I’ve drank alcohol since my wedding reception four years ago. Neither has my wife. This is all news to us. I had no idea we were such libertines.

Also, why do priests drink when the bible expressely says for a bishop not to drink.

No it doesn’t. 1 Tim 3:3 says he must not be “a drunkard.”

A Bishop is the leader of a church according to the bible and the bible says that they CAN marry woman. Why does your church forbid marriage to them?

No, 1 Tim 3:2 says that a clergyman can be married to only ONE wife as opposed to many wives. The purpose of the verse is to prohibit polygamy, not enforce marriage. The author of that very verse, St Paul, was an unmarried bishop!

Nowhere does the Bible require clergy to be married. If a Protestant pastor’s wife dies, does that disqualify him from being a pastor, beacuse he’s no longer married? Poor Rev. Billy Graham just lost his wife a few months ago – does that disqualify him from serving as a clergyman, because he’s now unmarried?