Salvation

[ChrisWRIT]

By Nick Jones
The RCC teaches a humanistic man-centered view of salvation. According to Rome, Jesus doesn’t actually save anyone. He makes salvation POSSIBLE for everyone, but ultimately a person is only saved by using his or her “free” will to make the GOOD choice of accepting Jesus and by their GOOD cooperation with God. And since, according to Rome, we reject God by every mortal sin we commit, we come into grace or walk away from grace by our own goodness or evilness. It is a complete nullification of the biblical conception of FREE GRACE saving sinful mankind. If salvation is granted on the basis of our own worthiness it is certainly NOT FREE.

Sigh. :nope:

Nick, it would really help if you would spend less time repeating misinformed Protestant rants about what the Catholic Church supposedly teaches, & simply click a few links so you can read & learn what the Catholic Church actually teaches.

CCC
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P6Y.HTM

***1988 ***Through the power of the Holy Spirit we take part in Christ’s Passion by dying to sin, and in his Resurrection by being born to a new life; we are members of his Body which is the Church, branches grafted onto the vine which is himself:…

1989 The first work of the grace of the Holy Spirit is conversion, effecting justification in accordance with Jesus’ proclamation at the beginning of the Gospel: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Moved by grace, man turns toward God and away from sin, thus accepting forgiveness and righteousness from on high. "Justification is not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man.

1990 Justification detaches man from sin which contradicts the love of God, and purifies his heart of sin. Justification follows upon God’s merciful initiative of offering forgiveness. It reconciles man with God. It frees from the enslavement to sin, and it heals.

1991 Justification is at the same time the acceptance of God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ. Righteousness (or “justice”) here means the rectitude of divine love. With justification, faith, hope, and charity are poured into our hearts, and obedience to the divine will is granted us.

1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. …

1993 Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:
When God touches man’s heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight.

Regards,

Chris

 

[Nick_Jones]

When God touches man’s heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it;

As I’ve been saying all along, the RC teaching on salvation is completely humanistic and man-centered. It is EARNED GRACE. It is the teaching that we come into grace by our own goodness (accepting grace) and we walk away from grace by our evilness (rejecting grace by our own mortal sin).

and yet, without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight.

What Rome gives God with one hand it immediately snatches away with other hand! They give God the credit for salvation by saying, “without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight.” But then they say, “man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it.”

This makes God’s grace an entirely useless thing to those who’s minds are hostile to God–the unregenerate, who are the very ones that are lost and blind to their own need for Jesus.

 

[guanophore]

As I’ve been saying all along, the RC teaching on salvation is completely humanistic and man-centered. It is EARNED GRACE. It is the teaching that we come into grace by our own goodness (accepting grace) and we walk away from grace by our evilness (rejecting grace by our own mortal sin).

You are in error on a number of points here. Catholic soteriology is based on the free gift of grace from God, merited by the work of Jesus on the cross.

Grace cannot be “earned” otherwise, it is no longer grace. The phrase “earned grace” is therefore meaningless.

Accepting grace has nothing to do with “goodness”. If you think that your own recognition that you need a savior is a “good” on your part, then you are in error. It requires insight, but not moral goodness.

People can choose to spurn God’s grace. Otherwise, how could human beings reject the purpose of God for themselves?

“…the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves…” Luke 7:30

God desires ALL men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Not all choose to accept God’s grace. It has nothing to do with being more “good”. Do you imagine that you are “better” than the Pharisees and the lawyers, because you accepted God’s grace? God’s grace will eventually transform you into something better, but at the start, we are all dead in our sins.

What Rome gives God with one hand it immediately snatches away with other hand! They give God the credit for salvation by saying, “without God’s grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God’s sight.” But then they say, “man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it.”

No, the cooperation with God’s grace requires a person to give both hands to God, and allow Him to pull the sinner out of the mire. It is not about “credit”, Nick. Those that do as God requires are unworthy servants, who have only done that which is their duty.

If you think it is not possible to reject God’s grace, then you will have to dispense with the passage quoted above. I wait with eagerness to learn how you will dispatch the plain meaning of this verse to support your Calvanistic theology.

This makes God’s grace an entirely useless thing to those who’s minds are hostile to God–the unregenerate, who are the very ones that are lost and blind to their own need for Jesus.

We just have a different concept of how it happens, Nick. Catholics believe that when Jesus was raised on the cross, He drew all men to Himself. Not all men respond to this drawing (what we call prevenient) grace. Those that do may be baptized, at which time original sin is washed away, and one is able to freely choose to walk with God.

To use an example from a passage we have discussed, the rich man experienced prevenient grace. He was drawn to Jesus, and asked what he could do to be saved. When instruction was given him, he rejected it.

 

[guanophore]

Do you remember me telling you HOW I became aware that I’m a horrible sinner in need of the Savior? Did I say that it was because of something supernatural from God?

Nope. I would have remained convinced that I never needed Jesus if not for the wonderful grace of God. I would have remained confident in my own flesh–in my own ability to know what is good, love what is good, and be good.

It is not necessary to be Catholic to be focused on your own supposed moral goodness. See Luke 18:9-14 about the Pharisee and the tax collector.

I agree. The RCC teaches a humanistic man-centered view of salvation. According to Rome, Jesus doesn’t actually save anyone. He makes salvation POSSIBLE for everyone, but ultimately a person is only saved by using his or her “free” will to make the GOOD choice of accepting Jesus and by their GOOD cooperation with God. And since, according to Rome, we reject God by every mortal sin we commit, we come into grace or walk away from grace by our own goodness or evilness. It is a complete nullification of the biblical conception of FREE GRACE saving sinful mankind. If salvation is granted on the basis of our own worthiness it is certainly NOT FREE.

According to this reasoning, you consider yourself morally superior because you recognized your need for a savior. You also consider Peter morally superior to the other Apostles:

Luke 5:7-8
8 But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.”

Because he recognized he was sinful, and needed a savior.

 

[guanophore]

Why do some people use their “free” will to make GOOD choices (to accept God and to cooperate with God) while others don’t? Are you saying that some people–the morally good ones, are just created morally superior to those who use their “free” will to make BAD choices?

You are assigning moral value to the ability to choose, which free will does not have. Free will is neutral, and can be exercised equally for good or evil. I am sure that therea re a number of reasons why people reject God’s purpose for themselves.

Luke 7:30
“…the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves…”

I think for the pharisees and athe lawyers it was pride and greed. I just talked to a young man the other day who said he could not become a christian because he had done “too many bad things”. He believes that he cannot be forgiven, I suppose. It could be shame.

I think there is no limit to what tactics the devil will use to keep us away from God.

It is unfortunate that I’m coming across as someone who thinks **“God just picks certain people to be saved and then saves them, regardless of anything they ever do, even believe.” ** What is it specifically that I said to come across that way?

It did not come across that way to me. But it does appear that you believe that some are predestined to salvation, and others to damnation, and that people don’t choose.

God’s grace brings specific sinners (the elect) to repentance by causing them to begin to see themselves as they really are–sinners deserving to burn in hell for all eternity. Jesus said, “you must be born again.” A person that has been born again will know that he or she is saved, and such a person will be really glad about it.

The insight into one’s need for salvation Catholics call prevenient (drawing) grace. If a person chooses to be born again, at that time we consider them rejenerated, and free from the bondage of sin, so that a person can walk as God commands.

Are they morally superior to others? By no means.

Luke 13:1-5
13:1 There were some present at that very time who told him of the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. 2 And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered thus? 3 I tell you, No; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. 4 Or those eighteen upon whom the tower in Silo’am fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who dwelt in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, No; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.”

Were those who were martyred for their faith “morally superior”? Jesus says no. Are those crushed by the tower morally inferior? Jesus says no. He says that we all alike are called to repentance.

 

[Odell]

Nick it is real easy to get on these forums and say the same things over and over and over.

It is another to actually answer question that have been given you

I mean if your a bible Christian how hard is it to answer questions?

I cant quite figure out why you are on here. Are you on here to repeat yourself, save souls? If you are it usually dont work if you dont have answers to biblical questions.

But keep repeating your self I gurantiee will be here long after your gone and when your of meassing with us lost cathlics who want listen to Nick who keeps repeating himself hoping we believe what he teaches the chruch teaches or what the Church actually teaches. Start your own forum you may have a bigger fan base:thumbsup:

I agree. The RCC teaches a humanistic man-centered view of salvation. According to Rome, Jesus doesn’t actually save anyone. He makes salvation POSSIBLE for everyone, but ultimately a person is only saved by using his or her “free” will to make the GOOD choice of accepting Jesus and by their GOOD cooperation with God. And since, according to Rome, we reject God by every mortal sin we commit, we come into grace or walk away from grace by our own goodness or evilness. It is a complete nullification of the biblical conception of FREE GRACE saving sinful mankind. If salvation is granted on the basis of our own worthiness it is certainly NOT FREE.

heard this before.

Does it need a response?

You are saying that the unregenerate man cannot seek God. However, we believe that regeneration is done by the HS. Since the HS was not poured out until Pentecost, how did people seek God and become righteous before then?

Yes, I do equate religion with the desire to feel after God and to find Him. And this is exactly what Paul is doing also in that passage. Religion is man’s attempt to find God. Human beings have an innate, created desire to walk in communion with their Creator. This is how He made us. I would not characterize this desire for the transcendent as either good or evil. It is part of human nature, just like our emotions, intellect, hands, feet, etc. One can certainly apply ones “members” toward good or evil, but of itself, the desire for the transcendent is neutral. Unfortunately, having the desire is insufficient, becuase the unregenerate mind is hostile to God. Therefore, our inner desire for the transcendant results in a twisted outcome. It is only by grace, connecting to it, that we are able to be reuinited with our Creator.

guanophore another post gone un answered by Nick

 

[guanophore]

I agree. The RCC teaches a humanistic man-centered view of salvation. According to Rome, Jesus doesn’t actually save anyone.

I agree with the observation that this is a bald face lie, and also add my plea that you STOP SPREADING IT!!! You are bearing false witness against your neighbor, and such behavior has eternal consequences. You are also in danger of being censured on the forum, and possibly banned. It is not permitted for you to come here and spread lies and calumny about our faith.

He makes salvation POSSIBLE for everyone, but ultimately a person is only saved by using his or her “free” will to make the GOOD choice of accepting Jesus and by their GOOD cooperation with God.

If you wish to track the origin of the Christian understanding of the nature of man and the nature of the fall, and the nature of grace, you must go much further back than Rome. These ideas were taken from Hebrew belief, and predated the Church in Rome for four millenia. Why do Christians adopt the Jewish notion of salvation? Because our faith is based upon the Teachings of Jesus, who is the most pure Jew that ever lived.

Jesus corrected any misunderstandings of the readings and practices, but he left the bulk of Jewish faith intact, which tells us that the Jews had received His revelation of Himself properly.

As you know, God created Adam and Eve and gave them a choice. They could depend upon Him to know the Truth, or rely on themselves. They chose to spurn the purpose of God for themselves, and we now bear the consequences of their choice. This has been the whole history of mankind since.

Gen 4:4-7
Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat portions. And the LORD had regard for Abel and his offering, 5 but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. 6 The LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is couching at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.”

Mankind does have a part in accepting God’s grace. It is not about being “morally superior” as you imply, but whether one humbles himself under the mighty hand of God, or decides to be arrogant. In fact, those who are separated from God as Cain was are those who believe they are morally superior, just as Adam and Eve thought they could become like “gods knowing good and evil”. One either chooses to depend fully upon God, or go one’s own way (hubris).

Deut 30:15-19

15 "See, I have set before you this day life and good, death and evil. 16 If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you this day, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his ordinances, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land which you are entering to take possession of it. 17 But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, 18 I declare to you this day, that you shall perish; you shall not live long in the land which you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess. 19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live…"

Mankind is given choice between good and evil. He wants ALL to choose life and goodness. Yet in His permissive will, he allows the heart of man to turn away. This is not His desire, for He has created us to have fellowship with Him. However, our arrogance through sin will separate us from Him. Since He is pure, He will not have anything impure in His Presence, so those that choose evil cannot be in HIs presence.

All of this has pre-dated Rome for thousands of years, so I will thank you to stop spreading this vicious lie about Roman Catholicism. Not only is it misleading, but it is disrespectful to all Catholics who embrace “salvation from the Jews” that are not part of the Roman Rite.

And since, according to Rome, we reject God by every mortal sin we commit, we come into grace or walk away from grace by our own goodness or evilness. It is a complete nullification of the biblical conception of FREE GRACE saving sinful mankind. If salvation is granted on the basis of our own worthiness it is certainly NOT FREE.

I urge you to carefully consider the above passages. Try to put aside your great prejudice toward “Rome” and realize that the choice to walk away from grace has nothing to do with “Rome”. Although the word “grace” is not used in these passages, it is clear from the context that those who are obedient to God will inherit the promises He has given. This is not based upon “our own worthiness” as you purport,but on the mercy of God.

 

[Nick_Jones]

This is very true. At the community college near here they are giving away free hygiene kits. They come with a bunch of coupons and travel sizes of products. Some people walk by and don’t take one. They are still free.

You are comparing apples and oranges. How can a sinful mind accept what the sinful mind detests with every molecule in his body? Most free gifts are acceptable to the sinful mind. But the gift of salvation will only be accepted by those who have come to the realization that they deserve to burn in hell for their sins.

 

[Nick_Jones]

I want to clarify something here. I did not, in my post above, mean to imply that Nick had a good understanding of how the Church teaches salvation, or that what he said was correct in anyway. I was just speaking of the part in the middle about us using our free will. Hope I didn’t offend anyone.

If I’ve gotten wrong any detail of the teachings of the Catholic church regarding salvation or grace, please point out where, specifically, I’ve gotten it wrong.

 

[Nick_Jones]

This is a boldfaced lie and I ask that you stop spreading it.

Please tell me specifically, what is a boldfaced lie. If I’m guilty, I’ll apologize. That is a promise.

 

[bookgirl32]

If I’ve gotten wrong any detail of the teachings of the Catholic church regarding salvation or grace, please point out where, specifically, I’ve gotten it wrong.

That the Church teaches (and that we believe) that we can earn our salvation. That we are “good enough” at anything to save ourselves. That the Church teaches that Jesus doesn’t really save us, that we save ourselves. Um, how’s that?

 

[bookgirl32]

You are comparing apples and oranges. How can a sinful mind accept what the sinful mind detests with every molecule in his body? Most free gifts are acceptable to the sinful mind. But the gift of salvation will only be accepted by those who have come to the realization that they deserve to burn in hell for their sins.

I suggest you go back and read Genesis. Especially the part where God looks at what He’s created and declares it “good”. At what point do you read that what God created was no longer good?

Most free gifts are acceptable to the sinful mind.

So you do admit here that free gifts can be not accepted, and that that doesn’t make them not free?

 

[Nick_Jones]

Well, the fact the Catholic Church is the one instituted by Christ is a bit more important than when he instituted it, but yes, that is a small part of it. But there are more reasons I trust it to help me understand the truth.

Jesus said, “I am the truth” and, “no one comes to the Father except through me.”

For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.

**1) **The Bible, supported by several outside sources (ECF’s, historians, etc.) shows that the Catholic Church is the one instituted by Christ.

Outside sources? Can churchianity save your soul?

**2) **Not only that, but the Catholic Church existed before the Bible did (specifically, the NT scriptures, if you want to pick nits.) Yes, the books of the NT were written between about 50-110 AD, but they were hardly universally available. (The Galations didn’t exactly fax St. Paul’s epistle to everyone in the vicinity to “spread the word”.) - No sarcasm intended!

**3) **The complete Bible (the entire canon) was revealed to the world by the Catholic Church in the 4th & 5th centuries. Yes, specific works were viewed as scripture by other parts of scripture, like some of Paul’s writings being held as authoritative by Peter, but this is of little wonder given that Peter knew Paul was an apostle who was preaching the same gospel. Not only were there inspired books that were universally thought to be inspired like Hebrews & Revelations), but several non-inspired works were thought to be so (like Clement’s letter to the Corinthians, the Apocalypse of Paul, & the Apocalypse of Peter.) It took the Catholic Church to reveal scripture in its entirety – not only what was to be included, but what was not to be.)

**4) **There is a great amount of scriptural evidence that there cannot be some vague, invisible church that can hold contradictory doctrines. I recommend you take 45 minutes to download & listen to a free mp3 talk on the subject of “One Church”, by by John Martignoni of the Bible Christian Society. biblechristiansociety.com/download/mp3/one_church.mp3

**5) **The teaching of the Catholic Church is not only the most consistent with scripture, but it is the most logical, coherent & complete body of doctrine that exists. The Protestant belief in private interpretation has only served to create endless division, which has resulted in the “merely” thousands of denominations (conservatively speaking) which claim different, contradictory & often mutually exclusive doctrines, all from “the Bible alone.”

The final point is the fact that the doctrine of “Scripture Alone” is self-refuting. What scripture is truly inspired of God cannot be found in the Bible.

Jesus said, “I am the way.” Rome says, “We are the way.” As for me, I will follow Jesus.

 

[bookgirl32]

Jesus said, “I am the truth” and, “no one comes to the Father except through me.”

For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.

Outside sources? Can churchianity save your soul?

Jesus said, “I am the way.” Rome says, “We are the way.” As for me, I will follow Jesus.

Let’s go this route then. How did you originally find out about Jesus?

 

[bookgirl32]

Rome says, "We are the way

Last I checked “Rome” was a city in Italy, not a Church.

Secondly, if you mean the Catholic Church says, “We are the way”, you’re incorrect.

 

[Nick_Jones]

You are assigning moral value to the ability to choose, which free will does not have.

No, I’m pointing out that the RC emphasis on free will reveals that they believe that some people will use their free will for making GOOD choices and others use their free will for making BAD choices. There is nothing “neutral” about this.

 

[bookgirl32]

No, I’m pointing out that the RC emphasis on free will reveals that they believe that some people will use their free will for making GOOD choices and others use their free will for making BAD choices. There is nothing “neutral” about this.

Nope, wrong again. Sorry to tell you this Nick, but what you believe, and continue to jam down our throats, doesn’t actually change the teaching of the Church.

 

[guanophore]

You are comparing apples and oranges. How can a sinful mind accept what the sinful mind detests with every molecule in his body? Most free gifts are acceptable to the sinful mind. But the gift of salvation will only be accepted by those who have come to the realization that they deserve to burn in hell for their sins.

You are drawing wrong conclusions because you are starting from a false premise. What you have been taught (total depravity) is not accurate. If this were true, then how is it that Abel’s sacrifice was accepted, but Cain’s was not? How did Abel know how to please God, after the Fall?

If I’ve gotten wrong any detail of the teachings of the Catholic church regarding salvation or grace, please point out where, specifically, I’ve gotten it wrong.

Actually, this has been pointed out to you for a couple years, apparently, and you are so entrenched in your anti-Catholic prejudice that you cannot recognize the Truth!

Jesus said, “I am the way.” Rome says, “We are the way.” As for me, I will follow Jesus.

This is just more anti Roman calumny, Nick. On the contrary, this concept is taught in all the Apostolic Churches (although Rome is one). All the churches founded by the Apostles believe that Jesus makes no distinction between Himself and His Body, and that the Church is the means by which He intends to bring the world to HImself.

No, I’m pointing out that the RC emphasis on free will reveals that they believe that some people will use their free will for making GOOD choices and others use their free will for making BAD choices. There is nothing “neutral” about this.

It is not “Roman”, Nick, it is the teaching we have from the Apostles. Certainly the choices that people make, and the actions that follow might be characterized as “good” or “bad”, but not the ability to choose. This is part of our innate humanity.

“…God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” 1 Tim 2:3-5

God pours out HIs grace upon ALL men, not just a few. Some choose to reject God’s purpose for themselves.

“… but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves” Luke 7:30

Do you believe that the same grace was not offered to all the Pharisees and the lawyers?

Nick, what would have to change if you accepted that Catholicism defeated Pelagianism a couple thousand years ago?

What is your investment in staying committed to the notion that Catholics believe in the heresy of Pelagius? How does this advance your own spiritual life?

And again, what brings you here to the forum? Is it your goal to convince Catholics that they are really Pelagians?

 

[Nick_Jones]

Hi Odell,

I’m not ignoring your questions. I am very busy with lots of work-related projects that often keep me away from the computer for most of the day. So, please don’t hesitate to ask again and again, if there are questions that I still haven’t answered.

Here is the question you referred to, that was asked by guanophore:

You are saying that the unregenerate man cannot seek God. However, we believe that regeneration is done by the HS. Since the HS was not poured out until Pentecost, how did people seek God and become righteous before then?

Are you saying the the Holy Spirit was not at work in the lives of certain people before the Pentecost?

Isaiah 63:11-14
Then his people recalled the days of old,
the days of Moses and his people—
where is he who brought them through the sea,
with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he who set
his Holy Spirit among them,

12 who sent his glorious arm of power
to be at Moses’ right hand,
who divided the waters before them,
to gain for himself everlasting renown,

13 who led them through the depths?
Like a horse in open country,
they did not stumble;

14 like cattle that go down to the plain,
they were given rest by the Spirit of the LORD.
This is how you guided your people
to make for yourself a glorious name.

 

[ChrisWRIT]

Jesus said, “I am the truth” and, “no one comes to the Father except through me.”

For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.

Outside sources? Can churchianity save your soul?

Jesus said, “I am the way.” Rome says, “We are the way.” As for me, I will follow Jesus.

An interesting, if clumsy attempt to claim the Catholic Church came “from the world.”

If you reject the Church, you reject the Bible. The Catholic Church predates the Bible (NT) by about 400 years. It didn’t magically drop out of the sky from the place Jesus ascended into the clouds as soon as He disappeared from view. The Church, the apostles & their successors, could & did teach without benefit of the Bible for centuries. How?

John 14:26 - “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.”

Yes, individual books of the NT began to appear possibly as early as 10 years or so after Jesus death, but the claim that these individual parts of scripture could have been sufficient isn’t just absurd, but ludicrous. It is the ultimate claim that “context doesn’t matter”. Everyone who accepts the Bible as the inspired, written word of God implicitly accepts the Catholic Church’s determination of the canon of inspired NT Scripture.

“Outside sources” are not limited to the Catholic Church, but include history, eyewitness testimony & archeology, among others, all of which carry far more weight than feelings, “inner convictions”, or someone else’s say so (like a pastor), all of which are also “outside sources”, but are additionally subjective ones.

Your claim of what the Catholic Church teaches is, sadly enough, completely incorrect at best & intentionally false at worst.

The Church does not teach “self-serve salvation” or some such nonsense. It does not teach idol worship. It does not teach cannibalism. And it does not say “We are the way”, but rather “Christ is the way.”

The Catholic Church did not come “from the world”, but was specifically instituted by Jesus Christ, who said:

**Luke 10:16 - **“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.”

He gave the apostles authority & sent them out in His name. He further told them if any were to reject them, to leave, & “shake the dust from your feet”. (Luke 9:1-5, Mark 6:7-13 & Matt. 10:1-14.)

Nick, in the spirit of charity, I am not going to give you a pass on your display of intentional ignorance or laziness.

You have been given many links to see what the Catholic Church actually teaches, which are often quite clear & simple.

You have not only refused to bother looking at these sources of information, but have also flatly ignored what you have been told for the last two weeks, for the sake of endlessly repeating the same incorrect assertions.

If you are too lazy, scared, or stubborn to bother clicking links & reading, then at this time, I’m afraid there’s not much I or anyone here can do to help you to learn what you apparently don’t know.

Regards,

Chris