IMO... It's better to be Protestant, but tell me why it's better to be Catholic

[CWBetts]

Teach me why the Catholic Faith has a higher view of the person and work of Christ than historic Protestant theology. Protestants believe we are eternally justified by the perfect righteousness of Christ received upon initial faith in Him. His righteousness is imputed to our account upon conversion.

We are justified by the work of Christ’s sacrifice, and we cannot be Justified by “works of the law” (Judaic ceremonial law). At the same time if we love Jesus Christ, we will keep the commandments (moral law). The Scriptures clearly say that we must “work out our Salvation with fear and trembling,” which would indicate that Christianity is not a “no strings” religionbut quite to the contrary, a faith full if responsibility to continue in good works, because as the Scriptures clearly say, “Faith without works is dead.”

 

[TriuneUnity]

We are justified by the work of Christ’s sacrifice, and we cannot be Justified by “works of the law” (Judaic ceremonial law).

Where does Paul ever specify that it is only Judaic ceremonial law that cannot justify us as opposed to the whole of the Law, which includes the moral commandments? (And why would he even frame his discussion of the law along these lines, being no Jew ever thought the ceremonial law alone was justifying, but the ten commandments as well.)

which would indicate that Christianity is not a “no strings” religionbut quite to the contrary, a faith full if responsibility to continue in good works, because as the Scriptures clearly say, “Faith without works is dead.”

No strings for us; there were plenty of strings involved for Christ, who had to keep the law perfectly, and absorb its wrath in our place.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

We are justified by the work of Christ’s sacrifice, and we cannot be Justified by “works of the law” (Judaic ceremonial law). At the same time if we love Jesus Christ, we will keep the commandments (moral law). The Scriptures clearly say that we must “work out our Salvation with fear and trembling,” which would indicate that Christianity is not a “no strings” religionbut quite to the contrary, a faith full if responsibility to continue in good works, because as the Scriptures clearly say, “Faith without works is dead.”

Context my dear brother! How are we to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, or who is working out our salvation with fear and trembling? It’s God in us that creates our unity in Christ!

 

[Loboto-Me]

All Christians understand that we are to follow Jesus Christ, and do the will of God, loving God with all of our heart, soul, strength, and mind… and love our neighbor as ourselves, and to not sin. However, in this body will don’t do this perfectly. So, in Catholic Theology, what happens to Christians who are not able to follow Christ all the time, not able to do His will all the time, and not love God perfectly, not love our neighbor as ourselves all the time, and sin? God still requires perfection and sinlessness to be able to have God as our Father.

Catholics have a sacrament that Jesus incorporated called Confession/ Sacrament of Reconciliation

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

As you see, it wasn’t just an insignificant action by Jesus, he went through the trouble of breathing on them and giving then the Holy Ghost before he gave the command to forgive or retain sin. Showing that He wanted to give a special kind of authority to this.

The Catholic Church is a church of sinners FOR sinners, we don’t always love like we should, and we often sin but because Jesus gave special “powers” to the Apostles who in turn passed them on through the ages to our clergymen, we receive special graces when we take advantage of this special sacrament.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

Catholics have a sacrament that Jesus incorporated called Confession/ Sacrament of Reconciliation

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

As you see, it wasn’t just an insignificant action by Jesus, he went through the trouble of breathing on them and giving then the Holy Ghost before he gave the command to forgive or retain sin. Showing that He wanted to give a special kind of authority to this.

The Catholic Church is a church of sinners FOR sinners, we don’t always love like we should, and we often sin but because Jesus gave special “powers” to the Apostles who in turn passed them on through the ages to our clergymen, we receive special graces when we take advantage of this special sacrament.

If the Catholic Church has the exclusive keys to forgive sins, then how can Protestants be your seperated brothers in Christ if our sins have not been forgiven by the Catholic Church? Do you believe the Holy Ghost is not present in Protestant Churches?

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

Where does Paul ever specify that it is only Judaic ceremonial law that cannot justify us as opposed to the whole of the Law, which includes the moral commandments? (And why would he even frame his discussion of the law along these lines, being no Jew ever thought the ceremonial law alone was justifying, but the ten commandments as well.)

No strings for us; there were plenty of strings involved for Christ, who had to keep the law perfectly, and absorb its wrath in our place.

Do you think Genesis 15 and Romans 4 can give us insight how OT and NT Saints were justified?

 

[TriuneUnity]

Do you think Genesis 15 and Romans 4 can give us insight how OT and NT Saints were justified?

The OT saints were justified in the same manner as in the NT; by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. The only substantive difference was the specific knowledge that was given to them vis a vie revelation. The OT saints believed in the promised Messiah, the NT saints believe in the Messiah who has fulfilled the promise.

My question had to do with the oft used Catholic exegesis of Romans, which typically states that Paul was saying we are not justified by Old Testament ceremonial law. Paul was clearly stating that any aspect of the law cannot justify us, whether moral or ceremonial, because we cannot keep it perfecty, which is what the law requires.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

The OT saints were justified in the same manner as in the NT; by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. The only substantive difference was the specific knowledge that was given to them vis a vie revelation. The OT saints believed in the promised Messiah, the NT saints believe in the Messiah who has fulfilled the promise.

My question had to do with the oft used Catholic exegesis of Romans, which typically states that Paul was saying we are not justified by Old Testament ceremonial law. Paul was clearly stating that any aspect of the law cannot justify us, whether moral or ceremonial, because we cannot keep it perfecty, which is what the law requires.

Your post is in harmony with my OP.

And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” Galatians 3:8

For I know that my Redeemer lives,
and at the last he will stand upon the earth - Job from the OT

 

[CWBetts]

The OT saints were justified in the same manner as in the NT; by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. The only substantive difference was the specific knowledge that was given to them vis a vie revelation. The OT saints believed in the promised Messiah, the NT saints believe in the Messiah who has fulfilled the promise.

My question had to do with the oft used Catholic exegesis of Romans, which typically states that Paul was saying we are not justified by Old Testament ceremonial law. Paul was clearly stating that any aspect of the law cannot justify us, whether moral or ceremonial, because we cannot keep it perfecty, which is what the law requires.

If we are saved through faith alone, then why is it that the only time those two words appear in Scripture to gether, it is to tell us that we are NOT saved by faith alone?

 

[CWBetts]

Where does Paul ever specify that it is only Judaic ceremonial law that cannot justify us as opposed to the whole of the Law, which includes the moral commandments? (And why would he even frame his discussion of the law along these lines, being no Jew ever thought the ceremonial law alone was justifying, but the ten commandments as well.)

No strings for us; there were plenty of strings involved for Christ, who had to keep the law perfectly, and absorb its wrath in our place.

“works of the Law” is a particularly Pauline phrase. No other NT writer uses it. In fact it is exceedingly rare even in the ancient near east. With one exception. In the Qamran scrolls, there is a reference to “works of the Law” in a letter from the Essenes to the Pharisees. Guess what “works of the Law” refers to? Jewish Ceremonial Law. Now Paul, being a Pharisee would be familiar with this phrase. (Luther, being a self-righteous Monk, would not) End result: “Works of the Law” is in reference to ceremonial Law. Paul is difficult to understand (Peter attests to this), partially because when he mentions the Law, it is used in different senses in different places. I suggest you go back to studying.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Come on, CW, is the last part really necessary? “I suggest you go back to studying?” Trust me, Triune has done his homework and is a bright guy. I respect him.

Your post is correct when you refer to “works of Torah” in the Pauline letters. In the book “The Salvation Controversy” Jimmy Akin devotes an entire chapter explaining Paul’s verbage. His contention is that Protestants have viewed “works” as being actions by an individual that are good, virtuous, holy, kind, charitable, etc. when in reality Paul was speaking of abstaining from pork, ritual bathing, obeying the Sabbath, straining gnats, observing fasts, keeping to the rules. Akin’s book is well-written in understanding the Catholic point of view.

“works of the Law” is a particularly Pauline phrase. No other NT writer uses it. In fact it is exceedingly rare even in the ancient near east. With one exception. In the Qamran scrolls, there is a reference to “works of the Law” in a letter from the Essenes to the Pharisees. Guess what “works of the Law” refers to? Jewish Ceremonial Law. Now Paul, being a Pharisee would be familiar with this phrase. (Luther, being a self-righteous Monk, would not) End result: “Works of the Law” is in reference to ceremonial Law. Paul is difficult to understand (Peter attests to this), partially because when he mentions the Law, it is used in different senses in different places. I suggest you go back to studying.

 

[rovimax]

Being catholic, it brought out in me humility and service.

 

[paul_c]

All Christians understand that we are to follow Jesus Christ, and do the will of God, loving God with all of our heart, soul, strength, and mind… and love our neighbor as ourselves, and to not sin. However, in this body will don’t do this perfectly. So, in Catholic Theology, what happens to Christians who are not able to follow Christ all the time, not able to do His will all the time, and not love God perfectly, not love our neighbor as ourselves all the time, and sin? God still requires perfection and sinlessness to be able to have God as our Father.

In Catholic theology, if you fall from Grace through sin and are truly reptentent, you can be reconciled to God sacramentally (the sacrament of reconciliation is also known as confession or penance). By his mercy, God will take us back as often as we honestly request it. This requires confession to a priest contritely and with full repentence (meaning we will attempt to reform our lives) and to do the penance the priest proscribes for absolution.

 

[Loboto-Me]

If the Catholic Church has the exclusive keys to forgive sins, then how can Protestants be your seperated brothers in Christ if our sins have not been forgiven by the Catholic Church? Do you believe the Holy Ghost is not present in Protestant Churches?

I don’t know where you’re going with this statement. Forgiveness of sin has nothing to do with whether you are our separated brothers in Christ or not. As for the Holy Ghost being present in the Protestant Churches? He’s there to an extent because everyone is blessed with the Holy Spirit, but as for being present in the Protestant churches alone? No, the Holy Spirit doesn’t guide those churches. He certainly isn’t there when it comes to the Sacraments or guidance.

The Holy Spirit only guides the leader of that church in personal ways like He does all people, not in the way He guides the Catholic Church.

 

[TriuneUnity]

“works of the Law” is a particularly Pauline phrase. No other NT writer uses it. In fact it is exceedingly rare even in the ancient near east. With one exception. In the Qamran scrolls, there is a reference to “works of the Law” in a letter from the Essenes to the Pharisees. Guess what “works of the Law” refers to? Jewish Ceremonial Law. Now Paul, being a Pharisee would be familiar with this phrase. (Luther, being a self-righteous Monk, would not) End result: “Works of the Law” is in reference to ceremonial Law.

“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 3:19-20

Given your interpretation of Paul’s use of the word law, CW…Is Paul saying that the entire world is held accountable to God based on Judaic ceremonial law? Does failing to observe Levitical ceremonies make the entire world conscious of sin?

“Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.” - Romans 3:27-31

“All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)” - Romans 2:12-15

When were the Gentiles ever under the Judaic ceremonial law, CW? Is the Judaic ceremonial law written on the hearts of men?

 

[TriuneUnity]

Come on, CW, is the last part really necessary? “I suggest you go back to studying?” Trust me, Triune has done his homework and is a bright guy. I respect him.

Your post is correct when you refer to “works of Torah” in the Pauline letters. In the book “The Salvation Controversy” Jimmy Akin devotes an entire chapter explaining Paul’s verbage. His contention is that Protestants have viewed “works” as being actions by an individual that are good, virtuous, holy, kind, charitable, etc. when in reality Paul was speaking of abstaining from pork, ritual bathing, obeying the Sabbath, straining gnats, observing fasts, keeping to the rules. Akin’s book is well-written in understanding the Catholic point of view.

Thank you for the kind words, gurney.

I must, however, repudiate Akin’s interpretation here. There are, of course, examples where Paul is referring to ritualistic works done by the Jews, such as circumcision. In those instances, however, Paul clearly labels it as such. In the entire book of Romans, as well as Galatians, Paul’s use of the term “law” is, however, sweeping in its application. In Romans 2 and 3, Paul says the entire world, both Jew and Gentile, are condemned under the law and cannot be justified by it. He is clearly not referring to ceremonial law here, as he is applying it to both Jews and Gentiles. The Gentiles were never under Jewish ceremonial law, nor is it a facet of the human conscience, nor written on the hearts of men. Paul is referring here to God’s holy will as summarized in the Commandments. This is the only aspect of the law that is universal and not specific to the Israelite people. Paul also uses Abraham as an example in Romans chapter 4; Abraham was never under Levitical ceremonial law.

 

[CWBetts]

Thank you for the kind words, gurney.

I must, however, repudiate Akin’s interpretation here. There are, of course, examples where Paul is referring to ritualistic works done by the Jews, such as circumcision. In those instances, however, Paul clearly labels it as such. In the entire book of Romans, as well as Galatians, Paul’s use of the term “law” is, however, sweeping in its application. In Romans 2 and 3, Paul says the entire world, both Jew and Gentile, are condemned under the law and cannot be justified by it. He is clearly not referring to ceremonial law here, as he is applying it to both Jews and Gentiles. The Gentiles were never under Jewish ceremonial law, nor is it a facet of the human conscience, nor written on the hearts of men. Paul is referring here to God’s holy will as summarized in the Commandments. This is the only aspect of the law that is universal and not specific to the Israelite people. Paul also uses Abraham as an example in Romans chapter 4; Abraham was never under Levitical ceremonial law.

Paul uses “law” in many different senses. “works of the Law” is about ceremonial Law. Luther got it wrong.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

“works of the Law” is a particularly Pauline phrase. No other NT writer uses it. In fact it is exceedingly rare even in the ancient near east. With one exception. In the Qamran scrolls, there is a reference to “works of the Law” in a letter from the Essenes to the Pharisees. Guess what “works of the Law” refers to? Jewish Ceremonial Law. Now Paul, being a Pharisee would be familiar with this phrase. (Luther, being a self-righteous Monk, would not) End result: “Works of the Law” is in reference to ceremonial Law. Paul is difficult to understand (Peter attests to this), partially because when he mentions the Law, it is used in different senses in different places. I suggest you go back to studying.

I would suggest to consider the books of Galatians and Romans in what Paul is revealing… and what is being discussing in how sinners are made right with God. How are you able to approach the throne of God on a daily basis?

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

In Catholic theology, if you fall from Grace through sin and are truly reptentent, you can be reconciled to God sacramentally (the sacrament of reconciliation is also known as confession or penance). By his mercy, God will take us back as often as we honestly request it. This requires confession to a priest contritely and with full repentence (meaning we will attempt to reform our lives) and to do the penance the priest proscribes for absolution.

Please help me understand what Catholic theology means by a fall from grace? Does that mean a person is apostate like in Hebrews 6?

Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 and of instruction about washings, [1] the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3 And this we will do if God permits. 4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt. 7 For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. 8 But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed, and its end is to be burned. - Hebrews 6

 

[TriuneUnity]

Paul uses “law” in many different senses. “works of the Law” is about ceremonial Law. Luther got it wrong.

“Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.”

When did the Gentiles ever believe that they were justified by Jewish ceremonial law, CW? Saying “Luther got it wrong” accomplishes nothing when you’ve yet to answer how Paul could be talking about ceremonial law when he states the entire world is condemned by the law.