The sufficiency of Christ

[PRmerger]

My view of the universal church makes your view of the Catholic Church as the new kid on the block (2,000 year old claim). I believe in remnant theology in which redemptive history began in Genesis 3. I believe the first members of this redemptive church could be Adam and Eve. However, we can know for certain that Abel was a member of the church of the remnant chosen by grace (Genesis 4 and Hebrews 12). Actually, my church began before the foundations of the world. Please continue to participate on this thread dear sister in Christ!

Ok, Adam. Please connect the dots for me. Your posting above, while eloquent, seems to me to be a nonsequitor.

Please help me reconcile your beliefs, as stated above, with your comment here:

Help me out, what choices did Augustine have in the year 386?

Are you saying that the only church around in the year 386 was the Catholic Church?

A “yes” or “no”, followed by a brief apologia would be great!

 

[2nd_Adam]

Ok, Adam. Please connect the dots for me. Your posting above, while eloquent, seems to me to be a nonsequitor.

Please help me reconcile your beliefs, as stated above, with your comment here:

Are you saying that the only church around in the year 386 was the Catholic Church?

A “yes” or “no”, followed by a brief apologia would be great!

I would imagine the great schism happened before Augustine’s time. Ahh, the Internet reveals the great schism happened after Augustine’s time.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Schism

I’m not sure, but please feel free to teach me some church history. There has always been a battle for the truth throughout the Old Testament and New Testament. False teachers are a common theme in the Bible. In general, Protestants tend to be weak in church history, and Catholics tend to be equally weak in the Scriptures. That statement can be supported by the posted work on Catholic Answers called “Catholics need to read the Scriptures”.

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t remember the actual sequence of those posts. However my intent is to separate Protestants and Orthodox from Mormonism since Zee is quite the presence on the threads that I post. I think Zee is stalking me. But that’s okay, who knows… God may grant Zee repentance, enabling him to come to the knowledge of the truth through his stalking?

Do you believe the Magisterium is giving the designated separated brethren title and privilege to Mormons and other groups that I excluded?

Oh. My. GOSH!!! This simply can’t be happening again. You make a statement (usually verging on the absurd), we ask for evidence, and then you give us…NOTHING.

sigh Absence of evidence is evidence that the statement was false.

Originally posted by Adam: I think the Magisterium would agree with me because I find that the Magisterium will only give the title of separated Christian brethrens to historic Christians only.

I would hope that you’d do the honorable thing and just admit [SIGN]I made that entire sentence up[/SIGN].

 

[PRmerger]

I’m not sure, but please feel free to teach me some church history.

You seem to know your history quite well, Adam. As you yourself stated: the only church around in Augustine’s time was the Catholic Church.

Again, you’re one step closer to joining us at the Divine Wedding Feast!

 

[2nd_Adam]

Oh. My. GOSH!!! This simply can’t be happening again. You make a statement (usually verging on the absurd), we ask for evidence, and then you give us…NOTHING.

sigh Absence of evidence is evidence that the statement was false.

So, please interpret the Magisterium for me. Who gets the privilege and title of separated brethren?

 

[2nd_Adam]

You seem to know your history quite well, Adam. As you yourself stated: the only church around in Augustine’s time was the Catholic Church.

Again, you’re one step closer to joining us at the Divine Wedding Feast!

I would have to disagree with you. The universal church chosen by grace is always around. The remnant church is the church within the church.

Romans 11

The Remnant of Israel

I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? “Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life.” But what is God’s reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.

What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, as it is written,

“God gave them a spirit of stupor,
eyes that would not see
and ears that would not hear,
down to this very day.”

And David says,

“Let their table become a snare and a trap,
a stumbling block and a retribution for them;
let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see,
and bend their backs forever.”
Sacred Scripture

The Parable of the Weeds

He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ But he said, ‘No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’”

 

[PRmerger]

I would have to disagree with you. The universal church chosen by grace is always around. The remnant church is the church within the church.

You disagree with your own statement, Adam?

Originally posted by Adam: Help me out, what choices did Augustine have in the year 386?

First you say that the only church around was the CC, now you say you disagree with that?

 

[Rocket_Man]

That is entirely your own invention, or the Calvinist invention. There is no scripture to back that up at all. On the contrary, the scriptures teach that one can be both justified and sanctified, and afterwards through the exercise of his freewill transgress and lose his justification and sanctification:

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28 He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, where
with he was sanctified. an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire

zerinus, you reading this text standing alone without the previous chapters where Paul is pleading his case for exactly against what your proposing. There is no mention of “they” being justified. What he is doing a making a point.

We all know there in only one path, right? Not all paths lead to God. Once a man knows this, that Jesus Christ is that path, and rejects it, there is nothing left anywhere that will save him.

 

[2nd_Adam]

You disagree with your own statement, Adam?

First you say that the only church around was the CC, now you say you disagree with that?

There is a visible and invisible church. If you really think about it, the Catholic Church believes is a similar concept.

 

[PRmerger]

There is a visible and invisible church. If you really think about it, the Catholic Church believes is a similar concept.

Yup. And, as you yourself stated, the only church around–that gave us the NT–was the Catholic Church.

 

[2nd_Adam]

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

I will leave my Catholic siblings in the hands of Rocket Man today.

 

[PRmerger]

So, please interpret the Magisterium for me. Who gets the privilege and title of separated brethren?

All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church. CCC 818

 

[izoid]

I would imagine the great schism happened before Augustine’s time. Ahh, the Internet reveals the great schism happened after Augustine’s time.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Schism

I’m not sure, but please feel free to teach me some church history. There has always been a battle for the truth throughout the Old Testament and New Testament. False teachers are a common theme in the Bible. In general, Protestants tend to be weak in church history, and Catholics tend to be equally weak in the Scriptures. That statement can be supported by the posted work on Catholic Answers called “Catholics need to read the Scriptures”.

This is the key to you being able to understand the true Church of Jesus. Adam, this is where my journey began, church history. I wanted to find which modern protestant church was most similar to the 1st century church. Guess what? I don’t need to answer that, you already know what I found out to be the case. Study history, protestant history is fine, study the ECF’s, you will find as I did. The protestant teachings DID NOT EXIST in the early church. This REALITY must be reconciled somehow. Either Catholicism was the faith that teh early church practiced or Christ failed to preserve the purity of His bride.

With this understanding you can then go to the scriptures. They will open up to you in a manner that you never thought possible. I was amazed that what I thought they said was in fact wrong.

I would unwittingly read verses through my own lenses only to find that I was reading words in them that did not exist. An example is in James, how was Abraham justified? By faith of course! Wrong, the verse says that Abraham was justified by WORKS! Imagine my horror, I searched my protestant translation to verify and guess what? It too said works (I am not stating that you are saved by works alone, I have made that clear already in this thread).

Adam, please do yourself a favor and set aside all preconceived ideas and spend 2 weeks studying church history and the writings of the ECF’s. You will be SHOCKED!

 

[2nd_Adam]

zerinus, you reading this text standing alone without the previous chapters where Paul is pleading his case for exactly against what your proposing. There is no mention of “they” being justified. What he is doing a making a point.

We all know there in only one path, right? Not all paths lead to God. Once a man knows this, that Jesus Christ is that path, and rejects it, there is nothing left anywhere that will save him.

Hey Rocket Man,

Please note that zerinus (Zee) is a Mormon missionary on Catholic Answers when you respond to him.

 

[izoid]

Hey Rocket Man,

Please note that zerinus (Zee) is a Mormon missionary on Catholic Answers when you respond to him.

Hey Rocket,

Please be aware that 2ndAdam is a Calvinist missionary here on CA.

 

[2nd_Adam]

All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church. CCC 818

Be more specific sister. I don’t believe the Magisterium acknowledges baptisms done within Mormonism. Who else does the Magisterium accept beyond Protestants, Anglicans, Orthodox and other Christians who adhere to the historic creeds of orthodoxy?

 

[2nd_Adam]

Hey Rocket,

Please be aware that 2ndAdam is a Calvinist missionary here on CA.

I wish I could change my screen name to something like Rocket Man or Tweetymom.

 

[2nd_Adam]

This is the key to you being able to understand the true Church of Jesus. Adam, this is where my journey began, church history. I wanted to find which modern protestant church was most similar to the 1st century church. Guess what? I don’t need to answer that, you already know what I found out to be the case. Study history, protestant history is fine, study the ECF’s, you will find as I did. The protestant teachings DID NOT EXIST in the early church. This REALITY must be reconciled somehow. Either Catholicism was the faith that teh early church practiced or Christ failed to preserve the purity of His bride.

With this understanding you can then go to the scriptures. They will open up to you in a manner that you never thought possible. I was amazed that what I thought they said was in fact wrong.

I would unwittingly read verses through my own lenses only to find that I was reading words in them that did not exist. An example is in James, how was Abraham justified? By faith of course! Wrong, the verse says that Abraham was justified by WORKS! Imagine my horror, I searched my protestant translation to verify and guess what? It too said works (I am not stating that you are saved by works alone, I have made that clear already in this thread).

Adam, please do yourself a favor and set aside all preconceived ideas and spend 2 weeks studying church history and the writings of the ECF’s. You will be SHOCKED!

Church History begins with the book of Acts which can also be called the Acts of the Apostles. Okay Rocket Man, please take over!

 

[izoid]

Church History begins with the book of Acts which can also be called the Acts of the Apostles. Okay Rocket Man, please take over!

No doubt about that brother.

I am serious when I encourage you to read the history though. You have nothing to loose. It should not be threatening or concerning for you at all. Did you know that books from the Apocrypha were considered authoritative as early as 250 AD? My protestant history book taught me that.

I tell you the truth, I was not looking for the Catholic church when I began reading church history. I really wanted to know which protestant denomination was closest to the 1st century church. My family and I were changing churches and I truly wanted to be worshipping as the 1st century Christians did.

 

[tweetymom]

If I became Catholic instead of remaining catholic, we wouldn’t have so much fun on Catholic Answers. If I converted to the Catholic Faith, I would spend my time on the Protestant Forum sites.

Adam you are so funny. And thank you for defending me. God Bless my brother in Christ.:tiphat: