Very confused on "No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church."

[Des]

Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved. Read all of the Bible, don’t stop with one scripture.

When one calls upon the name of the Lord, he/she are doing their utmost to follow His Will. For Catholics, a couple of these things are receiving the Sacraments of the Eucharistic and Reconciliation through a Man who has received the Sacrament of Holy Orders. So that verse is fitting to any Catholic who has just received these Sacraments.
There are many Catholics who feel they are currently saved. However, unlike your own personal claim, they do not know their future with Christ and neither do you. You can just as easily turn away from Christ 5 years from now of which your OSAS brethrens would say to each other: “Saved Lady was never saved to begin with”. So the reality of your situation is that even though you feel confident in your salvation, you honestly have no clue to the trials and tribulations that may lay ahead for you, causing your separation with Christ.

And for all we know, you currently could be rejecting Christ’s truth for your own selfish needs.
Example: Pride could be pushing you to turn your head away from the truth of the Sacrament of Confession with a Priest because it’s so much easier to ask God for forgiveness in your little room without humbling yourself before a man. Therefore you only will yourself to see passages in His Written Word to help justify your position. But that will be between you and Christ after you die of course. For it’s only He that can read your heart but you still have an obligation to Him, to seek within yourself a sincere conscience. The question is if you have truly done this.

 

[Bengoshi]

Ha ha! Yes!!! I gave it up for Lent this year, and will probably have to give it up again. Waaaaaaah!!! :crying:

You can listen to a few talks from Grudem here. I was blessed to have had my introduction to Christianity as an adult come to me through reading his Systematic Theology. It’s the systematic theology book that Sovereign Grace Ministries uses and I came to faith in Christ largely through their ministry. Reading Grudem was part of what led me to read John Calvin’s Institutes, and I was blessed to have been given the time in this life to be able to read both Systematic Theology and the Institutes cover to cover. It was really Grudem, Sproul, and Packer who led me to Calvin, Calvin who led me to Augustine, and Augustine, very surprisingly and unexpectedly, brought me safely home to the Catholic Church! I very much identify with Augustine and I truly believe that if you stay close to Augustine, you will stay close to Jesus.

Garrigou-Lagrange was one of John Paul II’s instructors, and he put out a book called Predestination. If you’d like, you can read the first five chapters of it here.

Your brother in the LORD,
Pete

Hey Pete,

Thanks for the links! I’ll try to acquire a copy of this Predestination book! It’s actually gonna be our topic tonight in our Systematic Theology class! I only have a softcopy of Calvin’s Institutes and it’s quite eye-straining to read everything from the screen. One of our pastors recetly bought a copy from a seminar he attended. I forgot which State it was held tho. I would love to have a copy of Summa Theologica as well, the Thomist view of Election is also good.

Godbless!

 

[Saved_Lady]

When one calls upon the name of the Lord, he/she are doing their utmost to follow His Will. For Catholics, a couple of these things are receiving the Sacraments of the Eucharistic and Reconciliation through a Man who has received the Sacrament of Holy Orders. So that verse is fitting to any Catholic who has just received these Sacraments.
There are many Catholics who feel they are currently saved. However, unlike your own personal claim, they do not know their future with Christ and neither do you. You can just as easily turn away from Christ 5 years from now of which your OSAS brethrens would say to each other: “Saved Lady was never saved to begin with”. So the reality of your situation is that even though you feel confident in your salvation, you honestly have no clue to the trials and tribulations that may lay ahead for you, causing your separation with Christ.

And for all we know, you currently could be rejecting Christ’s truth for your own selfish needs.
Example: Pride could be pushing you to turn your head away from the truth of the Sacrament of Confession with a Priest because it’s so much easier to ask God for forgiveness in your little room without humbling yourself before a man. Therefore you only will yourself to see passages in His Written Word to help justify your position. But that will be between you and Christ after you die of course. For it’s only He that can read your heart but you still have an obligation to Him, to seek within yourself a sincere conscience. The question is if you have truly done this.

You believe what you want and I will believe what God has put in my heart. I am through with this subject.
God Bless you and may you find peace and understanding in the Bible as I have.
Love in Christ

 

[Beth_Martin]

Beth,
I’m jumping in the middle here, but I think you are making this unnecessarily difficult.
You see, The core of Jesus’s message is love, not faith. And love is an action word. To love is to do things for God and others without expecting anything in return. Remember the Great commandment," Love God with all your heart, all your strength, and all your mind and love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus described this as the essence of the teachings of Moses and the prophets. And his new commandment was to love each other as he love us. and when asked directly on what it took to gain eternal life in Matthew 19, he didn’t say “have faith in me”, he said to follow the commandments. We are called to love with no strings attached, even to love our enemies… This is what it takes to gain eternal life. We can not be judged on our faith, only on how we live our faith and that means, we will be judged on how we love.

Living a life of love is work, no doubt about it. But it in no way diminishes Christ attonement. Jesus showed us the way to eternal life. As he says throughout the gospels, we need to follow him. Words are not enough. We need to do as he did.

Take the words of the Apostles to heart. Read 1Corinthians 13 and see that Paul says that if you have faith enough to move mountains, but do not have love, you are nothing. And read James 2; and understand that faith without works is dead. Even the Demons believe that Jesus is the son of God. In fact, they know it to be true. It takes more than faith to be saved. You must live out your faith. surely you must understand this. And if you must live out your faith, your salvation can not be assured until you die while still in the state of grace, having successfully lived out the faith.

As for baptism being necessary for Salvation, this can not be denied. Why else would baptism have such a prominent role in the gospel? And why else would Jesus have told the Apostles to baptize all the nations in the great commission (Matthew 28: 18-20). Oh, and by the way, the eucharist is also necessary for eternal life. If you don’t eat Jesus’ body and drink his blood, there is no life within you. (John 6).

No, the core of the gospel, which saves is faith, not love. For love will proceed from faith. You have it backwards. In fact, without faith; their is no relationship with God and therefore no love as God commands.

Water baptism has no place in the actual gospel message. Paul put it quite clearly.

1 Corinthians 2:1-51 And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. 2 For*** I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.*** 3 I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, 4 and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 so that ***your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. ***

Here Paul emphasizes the gospel and faith received by the power of God.

Here Paul is getting on the Galatians because they started by faith and now the Jusizers have crept in and have begun to teach them a “works-righteousness” gospel and Paul corrects them.

Galatians 3:1-3 You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed {as} crucified? 2 This is the only thing I want to find out from you: ***did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? ***3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?

They started by faith in the spirit and are now trying to perfect it by the flesh; can’t be done.

Even in you post above; you should see that it is faith that always preceeds love. If you believe you can work or love your way to into heaven, then have at it; I won’t and can’t stand in your way. True faith is always manifested by love and is perfected by the power of God working in the Christian.

 

[Beth_Martin]

Then who wrote down the oral? Did every word the apostles or Christ say was written down somewhere that you have at your disposal? Many of the things have been headed down by the early Church fathers. Have you read any of them to see what the early Christians actually believed? If you do not know what they believe who were taught the oral teachings then how do you really know what the Apostle mean by what is written down or are you trying to say what is in the bible is all the Apostles ever said for those 70 years after Christ rose.

Open your Bible and look at who the Holy Spirit used to write what is known as Scripture and the book we call the Bible. Hope that helps. The Scriptures are the revelation that God has given to man about the way of salvation and godly living. If revelation is continuous and ongoing, then who has this extra revelation? The JW’s, the Mormons, or all of them? Wether 50, 100, 500, or 1700 years afterward does not make any difference if the claim is extra revelation. Not everything the Apostles ever said is inspired, if it were so we would have it in the Scriptures; we have exactly what God wanted us to have and the topics of sin, repentance, salvation, sanctification, godly living are all consistent and is what God wanted us to know.

The Holy Spirit is not just the author of Scripture but the illuminator of Scripture - 1 John 2 verse 20 But you have an anointing ***{the Holy Spirit} ***from the Holy One, and you know all things. verse 21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth…verse 27 But the anointing {Holy Spirit} which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing {Holy Spirit} teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.
John 14 & John 15 and turn to 1 Corinthians 2 beginning in verse 9 But as it is written: “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.” 10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit."

This was borrowed from Isaiah, but these things are unavailable to the unregenerate, but to Christians, it is known. Reading further the spirit who is from God is given by the Spirit…and verse 12 sums it up “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.”

As far as the early church fathers, were they infallible? How can you know what parts they said were true and the parts that were not if one has no superior standard by which to compare, which is the Scriptures? How do you know you are not misunderstanding what they said without directly having the ability to ask them what they meant by what they said since what they spoke are not inspired unless you have a standard to compare it to? This is why the Scriptures are superior to all.

How as Christians can one tell if the preacher is teaching error if not for the power of the Holy Spirit giving the Christian the ability to tell the difference between truth and error. The problem in the church today is that no one cares about reading and studying the Bible and acting like those Bereans to see if what is taught is true or not. Either way; if one is not a Christian; no amount of reading or studying will render one into the truth because the non-Christian is a natural man that cannot understand the things of God, but the Christian, who has the mind of Christ is able to tell or understand truth from error according the Holy Spirit and is judged by no one because the judge of all has already removed the Christians deserved damnation judgment onto Christ on behalf of the Christian. — see 1Corinthians 2

 

[Beth_Martin]

Beth:

Originally Posted by Beth Martin
Except the written and the oral are one in the same which is the Word of God. If you look closely at the verse you refer to all Paul is saying is the manner in which he delivered the gospel, either in written form or by mouth (oral).

God said the Holy Spirit He gives the Christian leads them into all truth; otherwise how would an individual be able to tell the difference between a true teacher and a false one - common sense and is exactly what God taught.

First, anyone reading Paul’s epistles can easily see that they are remedial in their nature. Paul and his companions had already preached in the various cities to whom he later addressed his epistles. If he hadn’t then who is he writing to? Who is going to read it? Second, Paul’s epistles, in and of themselves do not contain the complete Gospel. So to say that the Oral Tradition was reduced to writing so that the Oral Tradition and the Written Tradition are one and the same is foolhardy at best and is a pretext for wanting to believe sola scriptura.

Sola scriptura, meanwhile is a clever military maneuver by Satan. It is the old military concept utilized by Julius Caesar as well as others of dividing a superior opposing force so as to conquer it piece by piece rather than risking being enveloped and defeated. That sola scriptura has divided protestantism and continues to do so is undeniable.

If you claim as you did that the writings of Paul do not contain the full gospel, then you are spiritually appraised and know not the gospel.

Paul never said implicitly or explicitly that there was more “gospel” and neither did any other writer, but there are severe warnings to those who would add to the Scriptures. Paul did say he preached the gospel time and time again. Just as extra revelations have divided your church even down to how the Mass should be performed. Division has always been used by God to keep the pure gospel in tact and as time moves forward you will see more and more divisions as satan and ungodly men continue to infiltrate the church just as it did from the very beginning.

 

[paul_c]

No, the core of the gospel, which saves is faith, not love. For love will proceed from faith. You have it backwards. In fact, without faith; their is no relationship with God and therefore no love as God commands.

Water baptism has no place in the actual gospel message. Paul put it quite clearly.

1 Corinthians 2:1-51 And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. 2 For*** I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.*** 3 I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling, 4 and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 so that ***your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God. ***

Here Paul emphasizes the gospel and faith received by the power of God.

Here Paul is getting on the Galatians because they started by faith and now the Jusizers have crept in and have begun to teach them a “works-righteousness” gospel and Paul corrects them.

Galatians 3:1-3 You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed {as} crucified? 2 This is the only thing I want to find out from you: ***did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? ***3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?

They started by faith in the spirit and are now trying to perfect it by the flesh; can’t be done.

Even in you post above; you should see that it is faith that always preceeds love. If you believe you can work or love your way to into heaven, then have at it; I won’t and can’t stand in your way. True faith is always manifested by love and is perfected by the power of God working in the Christian.

Beth,
You are right that true faith is always manifested by love and is perfected by the power of God working in the Christian. Now follow that point to its logical conclusion. If you don’t have love, you do not have true faith. This is what St. James points out in James 2:24 (Faith without works is dead) and is also the background behind Corinthians13 (Faith hope and love remain, but the greatest of these is love.). And love must be demonstrated at all times to demonstrate that faith, so until you die, you can never be assured of heaven.

By the way, its completely foolish and ill informed to say that water baptism has no place in the Gospel. Jesus was baptized in water, his disciples baptized in water, he says in John 3 that you must be saved in water and spirit. In matthew 28:18-20, he calls on the apostles to baptize all the nations in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In Acts 2, when Peter is asked by the first converts what to do, he tells them to be baptized.

In 1 corinthians2, which you reference, Paul is simply pointing out to his converts in Corinth that the religion is founded on Jesus, not the Apostles. this has nothing to do with the efficacy of Baptism.

And in Galatians, you are right that Paul is telling them that they can’t be saved by following the Jewish laws but he is NOT saying that faith alone is sufficient for salvation. We know that he believes that if you had faith enough to move mountains but did not have love, you are nothing (1corinthians 13).

Open your heart to the whole Gospel and be truly saved.

 

[paul_c]

If you claim as you did that the writings of Paul do not contain the full gospel, then you are spiritually appraised and know not the gospel.

Paul never said implicitly or explicitly that there was more “gospel” and neither did any other writer, but there are severe warnings to those who would add to the Scriptures. Paul did say he preached the gospel time and time again. Just as extra revelations have divided your church even down to how the Mass should be performed. Division has always been used by God to keep the pure gospel in tact and as time moves forward you will see more and more divisions as satan and ungodly men continue to infiltrate the church just as it did from the very beginning.

Beth, try re-reading what you just wrote above. You state that God used division to keep the pure gospel intact and then you point out that satan and ungodly men infiltrate the church. God created one Church through Jesus Christ and that is the Catholic Church. It is satan and ungodly men that have distorted the truth and created division.

 

[inkaneer]

If you claim as you did that the writings of Paul do not contain the full gospel, then you are spiritually appraised and know not the gospel.

Paul never said implicitly or explicitly that there was more “gospel” and neither did any other writer, but there are severe warnings to those who would add to the Scriptures. Paul did say he preached the gospel time and time again. Just as extra revelations have divided your church even down to how the Mass should be performed. Division has always been used by God to keep the pure gospel in tact and as time moves forward you will see more and more divisions as satan and ungodly men continue to infiltrate the church just as it did from the very beginning.

Okay, show me where in his writings Paul mentions the beatitudes that Jesus preached in Matthew 5. Then show me where Paul writes that his letters contain the whole gospel. You say that Paul preached the gospel. No one doubts that at all. **BUT ** that is not the issue here. The issue is whether the full gospel is contained in Paul’s writings and it isn’t. Like I said, Paul’s writings are remedial to correct errors that developed in the cities and toewns that he first preached. But the totality of Paul’s preaching is not contained in his writings. Moreover, if the Bible contains the whole gospel then why did Jesus have twelve Apostles when most of them never wrote a single iota of inspired scripture? The fact is you’re stuck with sola scriptura which is, at it’s best a tradition of man and at its worst, a demonic plan to divide the christians. That it has succeeded in dividing christians is attested to by the thousands of protestant denominations. Like I said before, time to wake up and smell the incense. The Bible was a Catholic liturgical book [liturgical= to be used in worship] that protestants degraded to a self study guide to christianity.

 

[EDWARDJL]

Okay, show me where in his writings Paul mentions the beatitudes that Jesus preached in Matthew 5. Then show me where Paul writes that his letters contain the whole gospel. You say that Paul preached the gospel. No one doubts that at all. **BUT ** that is not the issue here. The issue is whether the full gospel is contained in Paul’s writings and it isn’t. Like I said, Paul’s writings are remedial to correct errors that developed in the cities and toewns that he first preached. But the totality of Paul’s preaching is not contained in his writings. Moreover, if the Bible contains the whole gospel then why did Jesus have twelve Apostles when most of them never wrote a single iota of inspired scripture? The fact is you’re stuck with sola scriptura which is, at it’s best a tradition of man and at its worst, a demonic plan to divide the christians. That it has succeeded in dividing christians is attested to by the thousands of protestant denominations. Like I said before, time to wake up and smell the incense. The Bible was a Catholic liturgical book [liturgical= to be used in worship] that protestants degraded to a self study guide to christianity.

I think there is alot of misunderstanding on both sides. First of all, the word Gospel comes from the greek word “Evangelium”, which means, good news. When Paul talks about the gospel, he is not referring to just Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. He is talking about the “good news” of our redemption through Christ Jesus. This is preached orally and written in the epistles, which appears to be the earliest writing of the New Testament.

Sola Scriptura does not mean that everything that was taught or true needs to be in the Bible. Sola Scriptura means that the Bible alone is the ultimate authority concerning teachings and doctrine. That was the original meaning by Luther and the reformers. Today many Evangelical Christians are teaching “Solo” Scriptura, not “Sola” Scriptura. This means that for anything to be recognized as true, it must be in the Bible.

I know many non-Catholic Christians who believe that the Bible is the highest authority of teaching, however, do believe in teachings which are not in the Bible. As long, as it does not contradict the bible. For example, many of these people believe that Peter and Paul were matyred, with Paul being beheaded and Peter Crucified upside down. This is not in the bible.

What they don’t believe is that any Church or leader having equal authority to the Bible. Many believe the Catholic Church puts the teachings of the Pope and the church on a higher level of authority than the bible. I think many Catholic may believe this.

However, that is not what the Catholic church teaches. It puts the large traditions, known as the deposits of faith, the oral teachings of Jesus on an equal level of authority with the bible. Catholic teaching does not try to overide the bible with oral teachings. They are compatible according to Catholic interpretation. However, many non-Catholic Christians do not have the same interpretation. The way they interpret those passages seems to present a contradiction to the Catholic oral tradition and the bible.

Having followed this thread for a while, I do not think that the Sola Scriptura is the root of the main differences. It is the interpretation of the scriptures themselves. The bigger issue that has divided Catholic and Protestants is the issue of “Solo Fide”, Justification by “faith alone”. Both Catholic and Protestants use the bible to defend their postiton. Primarily the books of Romans, Galatians, Ephesians and James. A different view of how one is ‘justified’ by God is drawn from the same passages. It doesn’t appear that either side has been persuaded one iota by the other.

 

[Sherry_G]

If you claim as you did that the writings of Paul do not contain the full gospel, then you are spiritually appraised and know not the gospel.

Paul never said implicitly or explicitly that there was more “gospel” and neither did any other writer, but there are severe warnings to those who would add to the Scriptures. Paul did say he preached the gospel time and time again. Just as extra revelations have divided your church even down to how the Mass should be performed. Division has always been used by God to keep the pure gospel in tact and as time moves forward you will see more and more divisions as satan and ungodly men continue to infiltrate the church just as it did from the very beginning.

Let me see if this is your statement: Paul spoke time and again and ONLY said what is written down???

 

[Beth_Martin]

After all the time and effort Pete has spent to give you some real avenues for study, growth in knowledge, understanding and wisdom, you might actually consider opening up your mind a little and exploring some of these tools. Many of your posts sound pretty much like those of a small child who is clinging to an idea they have, regardless of how many explanations and new ideas are offered for consideration. Since this website is offered for your education in the Catholic faith, why not give it a try instead of firing back as if you are playing in a ping pong game? I have been reading along and see how stubbornly you cling to some pretty bad arguments, no matter how many different ways things are explained or how many resources are suggested. Please try to consider that the Holy Bible was not assembled and put forth by the Catholic Church until nearly 400 years after Christ died. Since Christ did establish a Church and clearly says so in His own words, and also promised us that this Church would prevail until He comes again, there can be no other true Church. For Fifteen hundred years after Jesus Christ walked on this earth, everyone was a Catholic if they believed that Jesus Christ is Lord and Saviour. Everyone… Everyone. Heresies and schisms are all the work of Satan and have created thousands upon thousands of “new” teachings, including the one you are stubbornly clinging to out of false pride.

I pray that you will take some time to really pray about the wonderful teachings you are receiving here in this forum, spend some time studying and learning just how rich and wonderful the beautiful faith of our Catholic Church really is. Jesus did not make a mistake when he established our Church to lead us. There is always room for you, Beth. Let the Holy Spirit guide you into the fullness of the faith you were born for.

Hi Sherry,
The truth of God’s word always eats away at some folks and always has and always will just as God said it would; it sounds foolish and childish as you stated above; thank you for the blessing!! If you were like a Berean…never mind. I have and will continue to pray for you. May I suggest “Catholic Living” and not apologetics - just saying.

How is Pete going to grow in defending his faith when you keep interupting? The more he has a Protestant to practice on the better he will get; sure he can practice on another Catholic, but the whole idea of aplogetics is to defend the faith against those that would disagree on doctrinal matters and that is what he is doing.

Beth

 

[Beth_Martin]

There’s more!

What Beth Martin is forgetting also is, due to these unauthorised interpretations of the Catholic Church’s New Testament that She gave us, guided by the Holy Spirit, that “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (Jn 21:25).

That has been addressed. Key word is “DID” not taught. How many thousands of mircles by healing do you think Jesus performed? How many pages would it take to write them all in detail? Speaking of detail; perhaps paying attention to the details isn’t such a bad idea. Even if we changed it to say “said”; God gave the Scriptures to man and they are God breathed which is why the Scriptures are called the “living Word” and why they have the power to transform lives. We can all be sure that during the 3 years of ministry Jesus spoke many words that are not recorded and the Apostles and other writers as well, but God, not a church, gave us the Scriptures He wanted us to have. The Holy Spirit is the only authorized interpreter of Scripture and He is given to those who walk by faith and not by sight.

 

[Beth_Martin]

There is a difference when one says there are differences between mere opinions regarding which Mass would bring the faithful closer or if the divisions are caused over their belief whether the New Mass is licit or not. If the latter, then those who believe it’s illicit have placed their trust in themselves and outside the Church just as you have done.

But here’s the crux of the matter. ‘Everyone’ who submits to the Magisterium in union with the Pope are of one faith, flock and fold. However, not everyone who clings to sola Scripture will be, just as my non denom friends refute your own personal dogmas as you do theirs. Kind of makes one think doesn’t it.

How much submission counts? 25% count?, 50% count? 75% count? or 100% count?

I showed one of my non denom friends this post on her cell phone today and she had quite the laugh Beth. And she added a 4th sola Sciptura person who disagrees with your claim as well. Her friend who’s been going to school for awhile to become a Pastor. So yeah…seems either you’re claiming to be their pope or you guys just can’t agree on things because of the poor logic of sola Scriptura. Take your pick.

Ask them where the extra revelation comes from and how they know it is from God, then give me a full report.

I can’t understand things so poorly put together. Did or did Paul not deemphasized WATER BAPTISM which we all know is a commandment of Jesus to them? If you say He didn’t, then your verse is useless since it proves he’s not deemphasizing anything here as I said before. If you say He did, then Paul is clearly going against the wishes of Christ when He said: " Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit."

Paul did not emphasize water baptism is relation to the salvation message of the gospel because he knows water baptism does not remove sin; only God removes sin and He does it directly. Since water baptism is a command of obedience and associates the Christian with Christ’s death, burial and resurrection it is important to be baptized with water but the Christian’s true and saving baptism is the one Jesus gives at the moment true faith in the Him takes place and that baptism is the one John the Baptist spoke of the Holy Spirit, which seals the believer to the day of redemption, which is the picture Peter painted that you are unable to see.

I've already given my opinion on the matter. Noah was saved from the body of sin of the unrighteous, that surrounded He and His family of that day, by the waters of the flood, giving a new birth or regenerating humanity just as the Spirit of God does through the waters of Baptism.

lol I can likewise say that the Lord saves us through the waters of Baptism or we are saved through the waters of Baptism by the Graces of God. Doesn’t change a thing. And sorry beth but you’re in a bit of a pickle because of the verse that follows when it says: "Whereunto Baptism being of the LIKE FORM now saveth you also’ meaning the element of the waters of Baptism being of the like form of the waters of Noah, now SAVETH YOU ALSO. Notice the word also there Beth. It’s connecting with the waters of Noah saving Him ALSO. You see how that works? And even without that word ‘also’ it’s still saying that the like form (water) now saves. This ‘like form’ word is a beauty actually because it’s connecting us to the physical element of water no matter how much you’d love to deny it.

As I said the Ark of salvation which sealed the only belivers and saved them from the judgment is the baptism of the Holy Spirit which is given by God, which when you go back to the account in Gensis you will see that it was God that closed the door of the Ark, thus sealing the believers which protected them from His wrath. The pickle you have is that Peter explicitly makes it clear he is not speaking of water by the statement*** “Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you–not the removal of dirt from the flesh*”**

Why did the Holy Spirit wrting through Peter put that in there? So the reader would not be confused as to what baptism the picture is.

As for all your other so called verses of ‘proof’ we can look at God using the waters of Baptism to ‘DESTROY’ our old self while likewise saving us from eternal damnation. There’s a double meaning there and we all know that the Bible is full of those.

If you believe you can merit salvation by something you do, then I agree. No one I know of in the OT was ever water baptized, but Hebrews tells us they were saved by faith, the only way God has ever saved a soul from hell.

 

[Beth_Martin]

Don’t feel sorry for me DES, rest assured I have not rejected anything from God. I am secure in my salvation because of the shed blood of Jesus Christ. God is not the author of confusing. I am not confused. The Bible is not for arguing over, it is to live by.
God Bless you!

You go sister!!

Beth

 

[davidv]

That has been addressed. Key word is “DID” not taught. How many thousands of mircles by healing do you think Jesus performed? How many pages would it take to write them all in detail? Speaking of detail; perhaps paying attention to the details isn’t such a bad idea. Even if we changed it to say “said”; God gave the Scriptures to man and they are God breathed which is why the Scriptures are called the “living Word” and why they have the power to transform lives. We can all be sure that during the 3 years of ministry Jesus spoke many words that are not recorded and the Apostles and other writers as well, but God, not a church, gave us the Scriptures He wanted us to have. The Holy Spirit is the only authorized interpreter of Scripture and He is given to those who walk by faith and not by sight.

Throughout salvation history God worked through people, rarely did he act on His own. The Bible did not drop from the sky one day. The first ones certainly weren’t in English.
Since you are not the Holy Spirit, why should I accept your interpretation?

 

[Beth_Martin]

Scripture records that Jesus establiahed A Church [Mt 16:18 ]. That is singular not plural. Scripture also records that Jesus prayed to his Father that his followers be one as He and the Father were one [John 17:11]. No one said that the scripture you quoted is wrong BUT I don’t see anything in scripture that says one interpretation is as good as another either. You see it is not the scripture that is wrong, after all, the scripture is entirely Catholic. It is your interpretation of scripture where you err.

Correction “will build” in the present participal which means it is ongoing from a point starting on the day of Pentecost until the bride is ready to be revealed.

Also, you miss the fact that the Bible say the whole creation, which includes the angels are waiting for the sons of God to be manifested, that would be His bride made up of all the saints…so the church is not yet revealed…oooppps little oversight on your understanding of church. There is one true church of Jesus yet to be revealed, which contains all the saints and we see all these buildings which contain a bunch of tares and wheats.

It is said that the Old Testament prefigures the New and the New Testament fulfills the Old. Look at the Old Testament and show me the times that the Jews were allowed to interpret the scriptures individually as you claim you can do now. It never happened. Every time the OT Jews deviated from the one acknowleged authority, be it Moses, Aaron, the prophets, etc. something bad happened to them. Even Jesus told the Jews to follow what the scribes and the Pharisees say “…for they sit on Moses’s seat” Mt 23:2. These were the very same scribes and Pharisees that Jesus called a “brood of vipers” Mt 12:34.
So how do you think it will be any different in the New Covenant? I would like an answer to that question too.

Words spoken in truth that should be taken notice of; for there is one true interpreter of Scripture, the Holy Spirit who dwells in all true saints. Only open to those who walk by faith in Christ and whom the Father has given to the Son. (John 17) Any one who adds to the Scriptures, the plagues in the Book, the Scriptures or the Bible will be added to them.

Protestantism and protestants themselves are in trouble. The five centuries of division and fracturing since Luther and his sola scriptura has led to a plethora of protestant denominations and it goes on unabated. Protestantism is nothing more than a cafeteria of where one can pick and choose which doctrines to hold or get rid of. Is this what Jesus meant when He prayed that His followers be one? Better wake up girl and smell the incense because maybe in the future you will long to smell it and won’t be able to smell it.

That is nothing new, that has happened since the beginning and is no different than within your own church. God works one heart at a time and he could careless about the inventions of men concerning religions or denominations because it is all by faith in Him just as He purposed and people cannot stand.

 

[inkaneer]

I think there is alot of misunderstanding on both sides. First of all, the word Gospel comes from the greek word “Evangelium”, which means, good news. When Paul talks about the gospel, he is not referring to just Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. He is talking about the “good news” of our redemption through Christ Jesus. This is preached orally and written in the epistles, which appears to be the earliest writing of the New Testament.

I disagree. Beth Martin stated explicitly that Paul’s writings contained the full gospel and I pointed out that Paul missed the beatitudes. Now he may have preached them but they are not contained in his writings which is the poster said contained “the full gospel”. Here is her own words on this:

“If you claim as you did that the writings of Paul do not contain the full gospel, then you are spiritually appraised and know not the gospel.”

Sola Scriptura does not mean that everything that was taught or true needs to be in the Bible. Sola Scriptura means that the Bible alone is the ultimate authority concerning teachings and doctrine. That was the original meaning by Luther and the reformers. Today many Evangelical Christians are teaching “Solo” Scriptura, not “Sola” Scriptura. This means that for anything to be recognized as true, it must be in the Bible.

Then please inform us as to what else is recognized as true that isn’t in the Bible and give us the authority behind it.

I know many non-Catholic Christians who believe that the Bible is the highest authority of teaching, however, do believe in teachings which are not in the Bible. As long, as it does not contradict the bible. For example, many of these people believe that Peter and Paul were matyred, with Paul being beheaded and Peter Crucified upside down. This is not in the bible.

No Peter and Paul’s martyrdoms are not in the Bible but it is history as attested to by early church writers. And speaking of these early church writers it seems to me that it is protestants who have the wrong perception of the Catholic use of the early church writers. They accuse us of claiming these writers were inspired which we do not. We accept them as historical witnesses of the christian faith in their time; a faith which was definitely Catholic and not protestant. To me it is a defensive measure on the part of protestants to bring up a red herring such as this to deflect attention to the fact that these early church writers were very Catholic. For instance, none of them ever taught sola scriptura.

What they don’t believe is that any Church or leader having equal authority to the Bible. Many believe the Catholic Church puts the teachings of the Pope and the church on a higher level of authority than the bible. I think many Catholic may believe this.

Well what you are telling us is that people who are supposedly sola scripturists really do not know scripture. How ironic is that?
EDWARDJL;6599867:

However, that is not what the Catholic church teaches. It puts the large traditions, known as the deposits of faith, the oral teachings of Jesus on an equal level of authority with the bible. Catholic teaching does not try to overide the bible with oral teachings. They are compatible according to Catholic interpretation. However, many non-Catholic Christians do not have the same interpretation. The way they interpret those passages seems to present a contradiction to the Catholic oral tradition and the bible.

The books of the canon were chosen because they supported the teaching of the church. So they are completely compatible with the teaching of the church. The bible was originally intended as a liturgical book, a book of writings from which parts could be used in the celebration of the Mass. It was never intended to be a self study guide to christianity as the protestants have reduced it to.

Having followed this thread for a while, I do not think that the Sola Scriptura is the root of the main differences. It is the interpretation of the scriptures themselves. The bigger issue that has divided Catholic and Protestants is the issue of “Solo Fide”, Justification by “faith alone”. Both Catholic and Protestants use the bible to defend their postiton. Primarily the books of Romans, Galatians, Ephesians and James. A different view of how one is ‘justified’ by God is drawn from the same passages. It doesn’t appear that either side has been persuaded one iota by the other.

I disagree with you. Sola scriptura is the root of the problem because it is due to sola scriptura that the Bible became a religious football that could bounce any which way depending on one’s interpretation. Take away the authority to interpret scripture from the church and give it to everyone and you wind up with protestantism with its myriads of denominations which is in itself unscriptural as Jesus prayed that His followers would be one. As for sola fide, I say settle the sola scriptura issue and the sola fide becomes a non issue.

 

[Sherry_G]

Hi Sherry,
The truth of God’s word always eats away at some folks and always has and always will just as God said it would; it sounds foolish and childish as you stated above; thank you for the blessing!! If you were like a Berean…never mind. I have and will continue to pray for you. May I suggest “Catholic Living” and not apologetics - just saying.

How is Pete going to grow in defending his faith when you keep interupting? The more he has a Protestant to practice on the better he will get; sure he can practice on another Catholic, but the whole idea of aplogetics is to defend the faith against those that would disagree on doctrinal matters and that is what he is doing.

Beth

I guess the Holy Spirit told you to say this to me?? And by the way, since the Holy Spirit is the only one who can interpret the Bible, just where do you fit in? Do you have some papers or something? You are only expounding your very own personal interpretation, and surely the Holy Spirit would have stopped you before you made that remark about which forum I should visit…

 

[inkaneer]

Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
Scripture records that Jesus establiahed A Church [Mt 16:18 ]. That is singular not plural. Scripture also records that Jesus prayed to his Father that his followers be one as He and the Father were one [John 17:11]. No one said that the scripture you quoted is wrong BUT I don’t see anything in scripture that says one interpretation is as good as another either. You see it is not the scripture that is wrong, after all, the scripture is entirely Catholic. It is your interpretation of scripture where you err.

Correction “will build” in the present participal which means it is ongoing from a point starting on the day of Pentecost until the bride is ready to be revealed.

Regardless it is A church not churches. Your denomination doesn’t go back to the day of pentecost. Its at least 1500 years shy. OOOPS, doesn’t look like your denomination is that church does it?

Also, you miss the fact that the Bible say the whole creation, which includes the angels are waiting for the sons of God to be manifested, that would be His bride made up of all the saints…so the church is not yet revealed…oooppps little oversight on your understanding of church. There is one true church of Jesus yet to be revealed, which contains all the saints and we see all these buildings which contain a bunch of tares and wheats.

Care to give chapter and verse? I ask that because the book of Acts speaks of the church as already present

Quote: Originally posted by inkaneer
It is said that the Old Testament prefigures the New and the New Testament fulfills the Old. Look at the Old Testament and show me the times that the Jews were allowed to interpret the scriptures individually as you claim you can do now. It never happened. Every time the OT Jews deviated from the one acknowleged authority, be it Moses, Aaron, the prophets, etc. something bad happened to them. Even Jesus told the Jews to follow what the scribes and the Pharisees say “…for they sit on Moses’s seat” Mt 23:2. These were the very same scribes and Pharisees that Jesus called a “brood of vipers” Mt 12:34.
So how do you think it will be any different in the New Covenant? I would like an answer to that question too.

Words spoken in truth that should be taken notice of; for there is one true interpreter of Scripture, the Holy Spirit who dwells in all true saints. Only open to those who walk by faith in Christ and whom the Father has given to the Son. (John 17) Any one who adds to the Scriptures, the plagues in the Book, the Scriptures or the Bible will be added to them.

Nice try **BUT ** You still didn’t show the times that the Jews were allowed to interpret the scriptures individually as you claim you can do now. Why not? Why do you refuse to support your position with scripture?

Quote: Originally posted by inkaneer
Protestantism and protestants themselves are in trouble. The five centuries of division and fracturing since Luther and his sola scriptura has led to a plethora of protestant denominations and it goes on unabated. Protestantism is nothing more than a cafeteria of where one can pick and choose which doctrines to hold or get rid of. Is this what Jesus meant when He prayed that His followers be one? Better wake up girl and smell the incense because maybe in the future you will long to smell it and won’t be able to smell it.

That is nothing new, that has happened since the beginning and is no different than within your own church. God works one heart at a time and he could careless about the inventions of men concerning religions or denominations because it is all by faith in Him just as He purposed and people cannot stand.

That is so wrong it is pitiful, Jesus established one church. Jesus prayed that His followers would be one. But I can agree with you that He cares less about the denominations created by man in the 16th century but not for the reason you give that “…it is all by faith in Him just as He purposed”. Rather He could care less because of what He said in Mt 15:9:

“But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
[Mt 15:9]

You want to turn a blind eye to the continuing division of protestantism because you cannot deny it is happening.