What is the difference in Protestants being "saved" and Catholic salvation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IGotQuestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PRmerger said:
*Some *Protestants will acknowledge this…but most have never even thought about it.

And there is one Protestant who claims that he has been given special knowledge from God to read the texts and discern whether they are theopneustos.

(But that’s the only one I’ve ever encountered in all my years of dialogue).
Click to expand...
I guess those are the ones who think that the Bible just fell out of the sky into Luther’s hands.🤷
 
JMM1957 said:
Why so grumpy, LOL!!! :eek: Let’s just say then, that God is the author of the Bible, and the Catholic Church is it’s publisher… is that more palatable?🙂 Honestly, I was under the impression that even Protestant’s acknowledged that what was to be the canon of Scripture was debated and decided on by the Catholic Church. And yes, the Holy Spirit guided the Church flawlessly in deciding on what books to include that were inspired, and setting aside those books that were not inspired. It was not a quick decision either, much thought and debate went into it over centuries until it was finalized. So, yes, God gave us His Word in Scripture, allowed us to recognize it, and preserve it in the Church.
Click to expand...
Its true!! Many Protestants do not acknowledge the Catholic Church as the producer of their bibles. Some even claim there was no Catholic Church until the 8th century! I hate to say it like this, many despise us Catholics, some even feel pity for us poor, mislead Catholics. I am basing this on the Protestants I come into contact with on a daily basis and several “Christian” forums I used to frequent until I just couldn’t take it anymore. At least the Protestants here on CAF are actually civil. 🙂
 
PJM said:
If you’ll accept the bible; check these out:)

Mt 10: 1-8
Mt 16: 15-19
Jn.17: 11-6
Mk 16: 14-15
Mt 28:16-20

God Bless you,

Patrick
Click to expand...
You have been asked twice not to cut the profile so that it is easy to see the post you are quoting. It takes effort to remove this so I know it is on purpose. Your post become distracting I therefore am putting you on ignore.
 
adrift said:
You have been asked twice not to cut the profile so that it is easy to see the post you are quoting. It takes effort to remove this so I know it is on purpose. Your post become distracting I therefore am putting you on ignore.
Click to expand...
:sad_yes:
 
Porknpie said:
Then you would agree that nothing should be taken away from scripture.

Including the removal of 7 books, after 1,100 years of Christian belief.
Click to expand...
Those books were NEVER part of written Torah, They are Oral Torah i e. not inspired.
The CC added them.
 
eazyduzit said:
Those books were NEVER part of written Torah, They are Oral Torah i e. not inspired.
The CC added them.
Click to expand...
Eazy…can you then point out exactly when the CC added these 7 books?

And another question…are you the one to decide whether these 7 books are inspired or not?
 
JMM1957 said:
You also stated earlier: “There is a special area in heaven for children that died a violent death due to war or whatever because they need special care. There is another for aborted babies.”

Unless I misunderstand, you are stating this as though you accept these independent visions as fact to support your personal beliefs or the beliefs of your congregation. Or at least you consider these visions of heaven to be worthy of belief in the goodness of God. So, my question is, do some of your understandings of God and His goodness come from outside of Scripture?
Click to expand...
Anything I learn must not violate scripture in any way. One does need to be very careful, although not all things are primary. Anything from the enemy tends to focus on minimising the centrality of Christ or the importance of the atonement.
 
JMM1957 said:
👍 We as Catholics believe that in God’s goodness, mercy, and justice, and that He would not condemn aborted or unbaptized babies, and even though the Scriptures do not address this particular issue independently or specifically, we have the strong belief that there is a special place for these babies in eternal life. Because of the lack of definitive Scriptural evidence, we cannot say implicitly that they go to “heaven” itself. We must never be afraid to admit that there are some things about God that we don’t understand, but we know enough about Him to have faith, hope, and love. "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? (Rom. 11:33-34).
Click to expand...
Why the rush to baptize if you trust in God’s goodness and mercy as much as we do?
 
clem456 said:
The truth is, in it’s primary essence, the Person of Christ. Doctrines and dogmas and disciplines and catechesis are the “getting acquainted” with that person.

A person might know all truth as revealed in the written word and Tradition of the Catholic Church and still not know Jesus Christ.
Conversely a person might be completely ignorant of Scripture and Tradition and yet know Jesus Christ.
This is the clear teaching of the Church.
The knowing is not merely head knowledge, it is adherence to the person of Christ.
Click to expand...
Well said! The truth is not a concept, it is a person, Jesus Christ.

The so called “good theif” who died alongside Jesus probably had no knowledge of scripture, or doctrine, or gospel, but he recognized Jesus.
 
PRmerger said:
Yes. You are correct.

Bible verse for this, please?

And for this!

And for this!

Absolutely true.

But, as you already said, no one is innocent. We are all born in sin, right–didn’t you just say that?

At least, until that cute little baby is baptized.

So at least the Catholic model makes sense.

Of course God is merciful. Very Catholic, this!
Click to expand...
You didn’t get it. The Catholic model is not an expression of faith. Baptizing an infant is like buying fire insurance because you don’t trust God.
 
clem456 said:
Just to be clear, Christ has conquered sin and death. End of story (or more accurately, beginning of story…Good News for all of humanity). Jesus of Nazareth, through his offering of himself, is redemption for all sins of all time. In God there is no past, present, or future. He is beyond time. Our future sins do not vacate redemption.

The question is, will we accept redemption and attain salvation in him, or will we put our pride in the way and insist on the power our sins?
Click to expand...
Huge AMEN:thumbsup:

I know there are many Catholics who get it too!
 
PRmerger said:
So you are expressing a theological point–“babies who die in violent deaths have a special place in heave”–that’s not found in Scripture, but comes from private revelation.

So please don’t ever refer to yourself as a Bible Alone Christian,

or object to Catholicism, which also claims that Scripture is not the only source for our doctrines.
Click to expand...
You miss the point of what theBible Alone means. It does not mean that the Bible is an end in itself.

Scripture is there to lead one to Christ. By it we know truth from error. We know that the doctrine of Purgatory is against the Gospel along with the sale of indulgences.
 
PJM said:
So my friend, please show me how you’re disagreeing changes the FACTS:shrug:

Historically true is the fact the RCC was the ONLY Christian established-church and faith until the Great Eastern Schism of 1054:)

God Bless you,

Patrick
Click to expand...
The truth is there have always been small communities of independent Christians. We just don’t know much about them, but one such group that comes to mind are the Waldenses who lived in the mountains of northern Italy where no one bothered them and without the need to be political or powerful, they maintained a purer form of the Gospel.
 
pablope said:
Eazy…can you then point out exactly when the CC added these 7 books?

And another question…are you the one to decide whether these 7 books are inspired or not?
Click to expand...
The history is not as neat as you think. Jerome did not approve them. They were not in Cardinal Cagetan’s list of books. At the time they where written, they were not received as inspired.
There is no prophecy in them to compare with authentic scripture. It is like comparing coal with diamonds.
 
eazyduzit said:
You miss the point of what theBible Alone means. It does not mean that the Bible is an end in itself.

Scripture is there to lead one to Christ. By it we know truth from error. We know that the doctrine of Purgatory is against the Gospel along with the sale of indulgences.
Click to expand...
On the contrary Purgatory is in the Gospel. Although not called purgatory, the idea is there just like "Trinity is not stated in Scripture but is plainly is there.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
Click to expand...
The sale of indulgences is a myth
Myth 7: A person used to be able to buy indulgences.

One never could “buy” indulgences. The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms—indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences. The Catholic Encyclopedia states: "t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top