Why do some non-cathloics not have Baptism for infants

[Dokimas]

=guanophore;6740718]Of course not. We are saying that they are defined by Apostolic Teaching. Those who are separated from it come up with all kinds of wild ideas.

Seeing that you are speaking to me, what wild ideas to I have about major doctrines of the Bible?

It is certainly much safer to follow the instructions of the Apostles if we want to get to where they are. However, to the extent that our separated brethren retain the essentials as they were handed down to us, we have hope.

The apostles’ instructions are written for us in the NT.

So we can understand tessentials. Nice admission. Maybe you could share that truth with PR?

This is true. What distinguishes is whether the answers come from what was handed down from the Apostles. The Christian faith is to be received from those to whom it was committed. It is not to be extracted from writings 2000 years after the face.

Again, please share this with PR. She says we can’t and have never mentioned any Biblical essentials.

Oh. Okay. I misunderstood the post then.

Thank you.

You are creating falst dichotomies. The Bible is the product of Sacred Tradition, and cannot be separated from it. When this is done, error results. One error is that people are unable to see the Mass in the book of Revelation.

The Bible is the product of the Holy Spirit’s inspiration. Plain and simple. Anything else is sharing the glory ONLY due God.

I am sure it seems clear to you, but if what you were saying were true, then we would not have so many sects, and even cults. Some can read it, and not see the Trinity. Some read it, and cannot see the hypostatic union.

Maybe the CC needs to take some responsibility for the breaking away of people from their church. In the last 50 yrs or so, the church has lost members because of sexual abuse gone largely undealt with. This is but one example.

Trinity and hypostatic union are quite easily found in the Bible for anyone looking through the eyes of the Holy Spirit.

Some read it, and cannot see that Jesus only founded one Church, and gave authority to His Apostles. who passed it on to their successors.

It’s quite clear Jesus founded one church, a church with MANY members made up of believers, not an organization. Organizations, by their nature limit. Nothing should bound His church, it is His Body.

It is quite clear there is an authority structure to the church Jesus founded. We differ what that exactly means.

 

[rinnie]

I try to stick to the Bible and the Holy Spirit’s nudging. I’m sure you’re not saying they teach falsely.​

Maybe you could tell PR that you agree there are major doctrines in the Bible. She won’t hear it from any of us. Thanks.

If you are so sure that it is the Holy Spirit that is leading you to the truth and not your own mind why would you say that you try.

I would never deny the teaching of the Holy Spriit. But where does the bible say that it can teach and the teaching comes directly from the Holy Spirit.

My bible said that the bible cannot teach and scripture is a good thing to learn but must be TAUGHT by the Church. The bible said the CHURCH is what is led by the Holy Spirit not the words in the bible. Could you quote me the scripture that says that Human minds have replaced the Church and that the Holy Sprit teaches each person without the Church?

 

[rinnie]

Thank you. I see that part of the mass is taken from the Book of Revelation, verses picked out.

I couldn’t find in Rev 19:9 ‘happy are those who are called to us table.’

I cant see how you miss it Then the angel said to me BLESSED are those who have been called to the wedding feast of the Lamb.

That is the Eucharist. The Lamb of God is the Bread that is brought down from heaven by the Power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the Lamb of God he is the living Bread and the wedding feast is what we call Holy Communion with Christ (THE EUCHARIST)

 

[Dokimas]

If you are so sure that it is the Holy Spirit that is leading you to the truth and not your own mind why would you say that you try.

I would never deny the teaching of the Holy Spriit. But where does the bible say that it can teach and the teaching comes directly from the Holy Spirit.

My bible said that the bible cannot teach and scripture is a good thing to learn but must be TAUGHT by the Church. The bible said the CHURCH is what is led by the Holy Spirit not the words in the bible. Could you quote me the scripture that says that Human minds have replaced the Church and that the Holy Sprit teaches each person without the Church?

Of course there’s no verse with those words or implications.

You have no verse that say the CC it the only real voice of God.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

2 Peter 1:20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,
21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

John 5:39 "You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by LBKat

No, the verse does not come out say the scriptures are sufficient–but yet the verse is all-inclusive. Read it again–with verse 17:

16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work

The clarity is this: that the Bible is profitable and useful for everything–if so, why the need for something supplemental. This attests to Scripture’s own sufficiency.

All that to say, there were more verses I listed beside this one. And I will list another: Ps. 19:7-9

God bless

No offense,but that is totally an incorrect belief that scripture is sufficient. Look at the first word of verse 16: ALL. It does not read:

ONLY Scripture is breathed out by God…

 

[Nicea325]

Prove it. :ehh: Can you give me a list of them? Or have you just bought into the biggest catholic fabrication ever?

And even if you can find anywhere close to a tenth of that number, there is an important clarification that needs to be made to your statement:

*Correction:

“There’s over 40,000 different [professing] Protestant denominations.”

umm . . . I’m not seeing it. Can you please explain to me how I am supposed to believe that somehow Luke is there trying to communicate to his readers that Mary was born without the stain of original sin?

Catholic fabrication? And have you bought the Protestant fabrication there isn’t thousands of different denominations? Here is one source:

World Christian Encyclopedia : a comparative survey of churches and religions in the modern world

Authors: David B. Barrett, George T. Kurian, Todd M. Johnson.

Edition: 2nd ed.
Published: Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2001.

 

[guanophore]

If salvation is a major goal (and I can’t imagine not wanting to be saved) then —

Acts 16:
30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

There’s a direct teaching on at least part of what’s involved for a person to be saved.

Yes. But it does not identify itself as a “major doctrine”. It so happens we all agree that it is, but that is a resulf of an extrabiblical source. In your case, it is your imagination - “I can’t imagine not…”

In our case, it is receiving it from sacred tradition.

Not believing on the Lord Jesus Christ results in not being saved.

This is a false statement based upon an error in logic.

**

Dokimas:
I’d say that’s major. You may ask, "where’s the words ‘this is a major doctrine or this is an essential doctrine?’ but if you’re honest with yourself, they are silly questions.**

No, it is not silly. The fact that you would “say that’s major” really does not carry weight beyond yourself. This can be said of any of us, and in fact, people read through the Scriptures and most often decide for themselves what they think is “major” and what is not. Some think the Sabbath observance is major, some think the apostasy of the Church is major. Some think baptism is, other’s don’t.

 

[guanophore]

Seeing that you are speaking to me, what wild ideas to I have about major doctrines of the Bible?

One of them is that the Apostolic command contained withiin it to guard the Sacred Tradition is not relevant to you.

The apostles' instructions are written for us in the NT.

Apostolic instruction is contained in the NT. No effort was ever made to include it all, and the Sacred Text makes it clear that we are to follow the pardosis.

So we can understand tessentials. Nice admission. Maybe you could share that truth with PR?

The fact that we happen to agree on these changes nothing. There is nothing in the NT that distinguishes major from minor doctrines.

Again, please share this with PR. She says we can’t and have never mentioned any Biblical essentials.

No, she did not. She correctly pointed out that none of the essentials contained in the text are identified by the text as “major” or “minor”.

Of course there’s no verse with those words or implications.

This is honest. In fact, what we understand as major and minor doctrines is an extrabiblical tradition. For Catholics, it is handed down from the Apostles. For the children of the Reformers, it was invented 500 years ago.

You have no verse that say the CC it the only real voice of God.

This is not a concern for us, since the CC neither believes or teaches it.

The Bible is the product of the Holy Spirit’s inspiration. Plain and simple. Anything else is sharing the glory ONLY due God.

The HS chose human beings, through whom He spoke the inerrant inspired words. In this, His glory is revealed through humans. The NT was written by Catholic men, who expressed the faith of the Church. That is why there is nothing in the Scripture.that contradicts the Church.

Maybe the CC needs to take some responsibility for the breaking away of people from their church. In the last 50 yrs or so, the church has lost members because of sexual abuse gone largely undealt with. This is but one example.

This is like saying that Jesus needs to take responsibility for the betrayal of Judas.

The actions of sinful men do not belong to the Church. The Church is in capable of sinning since her Head is Christ, and she is ensouled by the HS. Men, however, are always in need of reform. Laying the blame for the shortcomings if humans at the feet of God is not appropriate.

Trinity and hypostatic union are quite easily found in the Bible for anyone looking through the eyes of the Holy Spirit.

I agree, but there are many who also believe they are looking through the eyes of the HS that don;t see them.

It’s quite clear Jesus founded one church, a church with MANY members made up of believers, not an organization. Organizations, by their nature limit. Nothing should bound His church, it is His Body.

The visible and tangible organizatio that He founded here on earth does, indeed have limitations. Humans have limitations. Jesus intended for His Church to be organized, and to exercise authority.

It is quite clear there is an authority structure to the church Jesus founded. We differ what that exactly means.

Well, which is it? You can’t have authority without organization!

 

[guanophore]

Of course there’s no verse with those words or implications.

The Scriptures are not to be used in separation from the teaching authority appointed by Christ, and from that which He has already revealed to the Church. He is not going to reveal something opposite to an individual reading now than what He revealed 1900 years ago to the Apostles and their disciples.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

Indeed, scripture is profitable in all these endeavors. So, what does your letter to the Eph. say about teachers and pastors?

Do you really believe Jesus set up something unnecessary?

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

And He taught His Apostles to do this also, and they to their successors. This is the beginning of the Teaching authority of the Church.

 

[Dokimas]

Yes. But it does not identify itself as a “major doctrine”. It so happens we all agree that it is, but that is a resulf of an extrabiblical source. In your case, it is your imagination - “I can’t imagine not…”

In our case, it is receiving it from sacred tradition.

This is a false statement based upon an error in logic.

**

No, it is not silly. The fact that you would “say that’s major” really does not carry weight beyond yourself. This can be said of any of us, and in fact, people read through the Scriptures and most often decide for themselves what they think is “major” and what is not. Some think the Sabbath observance is major, some think the apostasy of the Church is major. Some think baptism is, other’s don’t.**

I see there’s little to no grounds for discussion with you. You continue to misuse what I’ve said. Not to mention that this post of yours has taken a new low of condescension. Just when I thought thing were getting cordial, then you through this at me. I bow to your superiority (less you misunderstand - I bow not to worship but because of the verbal beating).

 

[PRmerger]

Yes. But it does not identify itself as a “major doctrine”. It so happens we all agree that it is, but that is a resulf of an extrabiblical source. In your case, it is your imagination - “I can’t imagine not…”

In our case, it is receiving it from sacred tradition.

Indeed. Those who use the “Bible Alone” cannot use the “Bible Alone” to determine what’s essential. If they agree on any essentials it is because they are agreeing with the authority of the CC.

 

[PRmerger]

No, it is not silly. The fact that you would “say that’s major” really does not carry weight beyond yourself. This can be said of any of us, and in fact, people read through the Scriptures and most often decide for themselves what they think is “major” and what is not. Some think the Sabbath observance is major, some think the apostasy of the Church is major. Some think baptism is, other’s don’t.

Exactly. Since being on the CAFs I have learned from one Protestant poster that this is a list of essentials:

Primary Essentials:

Diety of Christ – John 8:24, John 8:58 + Exodus 3:14.
Salvation by Grace – Gal 5:4, Eph 2:8-9
Resurrection of Christ – 1 Cor 15:14, 1 Cor 15:17
Gospel – Gal 1:8-9, 1 Cor 15:1-4
Monotheism – Exodus 20:3, Isaiah 43:10, 44:6,8, Exodus 20:3-6

Secondary Essentials:

Salvation – John 14:6
Trinity – John 3:16, John 5:26, 1 John 4:10, John 14:26, 15:26, Isaiah 44:24, Gal 3:13, Rom 15:16
Incarnation through Virgin Birth – Matt 1:23, John 8:24

yet another Protestant poster provided a completely different list of essential (with completely different Scripture verses):

“1) Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14; 8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4).
2) Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 15:14).
3) Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4).
4) The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus according to the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9).
5) There is only one God (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)
6) God exists as a Trinity of persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (1 John 5:7)
7) Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary (nature of incarnation)
8) Jesus is the only way to God the Father (John 14:6).”

and yet another Protestant poster has reduced the list of essentials to (inexplicably) “5 fundamentals”:

The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.
The virgin birth of Christ.
The belief that Christ’s death was an atonement for sin.
The bodily resurrection of Christ.
The historical reality of Christ’s miracles.

INCIDENTALLY, I noticed that not a single Protestant I cited listed Acts 16: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Nor did they put that it’s an essential to believe that God created the world out of nothing; that we are sinners; that we must forgive others; that we must feed the hungry and clothe the naked;

and…the most egregious oversight IMHO…

that God is LOVE.

However, putting those things as “essential” doctrines is merely my opinion, for there are no Scripture verses that tell us that it is essential to believe that we are sinners, must forgive others, etc etc etc.

 

[guanophore]

I see there’s little to no grounds for discussion with you. You continue to misuse what I’ve said. Not to mention that this post of yours has taken a new low of condescension. Just when I thought thing were getting cordial, then you through this at me. I bow to your superiority (less you misunderstand - I bow not to worship but because of the verbal beating).

There is nothing inherintly wrong with the human imagination. God created it, and He works through it.

It would be good if what you imagine were true, and that everyone did want to be saved but I think we will both agree that this is not the case.

God’s desire for all to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the Truth does not get fulfilled in the lives of some, who reject His purpose for themselves.

you did not respond to my observation that you came to a false conclusion based upon faulty logic. Why is that?

 

[guanophore]

Indeed. Those who use the “Bible Alone” cannot use the “Bible Alone” to determine what’s essential. If they agree on any essentials it is because they are agreeing with the authority of the CC.

Well, if they agree with what the Apostles believed, and taught, yes.

However, there are now many Protestant bodies that have defined and have major agreements in what they believe are “essentials” of the faith that are significantly divergent from the Apostolic faith.

Interestingly, I see a movement within evangelicalism to collapse the divergences and come together around as many of these “essentials” as possible. To me, it seems the HS is moving the church toward unity.

 

[ronin67]

The OP mentions INFANTS. It says nothing about a child. What about a baby? Why shouldn’t a baby/infant get baptized?

Where in the Holy Bible does it say that you must get baptized as a infant? Yes, it does say where Peter baptized entire households, but it didn’t say it was required. The infant is under the protection of the believing parents. Baptism, to many Protestant denominations (Baptist in particular, image that), is a person’s total commitment of actions thru the complete understanding of what he is declaring and accepting (Jesus Christ as his/her Lord and savior). Confirmed children often don’t even understand the impact of the accpetance of Jesus Christ our savior (I’ve seen many fall away from Christ and the church, because they really never understood in the first place). Prime example is me. Yes, I was baptized as an infant as prescribed by Christ Jesus in the Book of Matthew, went thru two years of confirmation and was not saved. I’m truly convinced if I would have died before I was reborn in August 2008, I would have went to hell. I never truely understood the impact of God’s great grace thru the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ until I was an 41 year old adult. I went thru my stages after graduating high school. I never, gave up on God or Christ, but I experimented with many ideas (Buddhism and how all paths lead to God). I also had the grand delusion, that all the major world religions were part of God’s grand scheme, in which God stratigically placed his prophets in different parts of the world at different times in history (Man, I was way off, but am very grateful Christ Jesus pulled me back in, “I am the way, the truth and the light. No one comes to the father except through me”). It is pretty bold claim to say that you are the only way to the Kingdom of heaven. Yet, Jesus gave all the physical evidence anyone could ever need to prove his case, unlike other professed prophets from other relgions.

May God Bless!

Ed

I believe that their are many Christian practices that don’t really line up with scripture, but they don’t go off “Way in Left Field” either.

 

[ronin67]

Exactly. Since being on the CAFs I have learned from one Protestant poster that this is a list of essentials:

Primary Essentials:

Diety of Christ – John 8:24, John 8:58 + Exodus 3:14.
Salvation by Grace – Gal 5:4, Eph 2:8-9
Resurrection of Christ – 1 Cor 15:14, 1 Cor 15:17
Gospel – Gal 1:8-9, 1 Cor 15:1-4
Monotheism – Exodus 20:3, Isaiah 43:10, 44:6,8, Exodus 20:3-6

Secondary Essentials:

Salvation – John 14:6
Trinity – John 3:16, John 5:26, 1 John 4:10, John 14:26, 15:26, Isaiah 44:24, Gal 3:13, Rom 15:16
Incarnation through Virgin Birth – Matt 1:23, John 8:24

yet another Protestant poster provided a completely different list of essential (with completely different Scripture verses):

“1) Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14; 8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4).
2) Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 15:14).
3) Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4).
4) The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus according to the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9).
5) There is only one God (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)
6) God exists as a Trinity of persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (1 John 5:7)
7) Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary (nature of incarnation)
8) Jesus is the only way to God the Father (John 14:6).”

and yet another Protestant poster has reduced the list of essentials to (inexplicably) “5 fundamentals”:

The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.
The virgin birth of Christ.
The belief that Christ’s death was an atonement for sin.
The bodily resurrection of Christ.
The historical reality of Christ’s miracles.

INCIDENTALLY, I noticed that not a single Protestant I cited listed Acts 16: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Nor did they put that it’s an essential to believe that God created the world out of nothing; that we are sinners; that we must forgive others; that we must feed the hungry and clothe the naked;

and…the most egregious oversight IMHO…

that God is LOVE.

However, putting those things as “essential” doctrines is merely my opinion, for there are no Scripture verses that tell us that it is essential to believe that we are sinners, must forgive others, etc etc etc.

Ma’am,

I always do love your posts. You are always very right to the point with biblical accuracy. It seems you use the Holy Bible quite a bit when pointing out truths of Christian beliefs. I am very surprised that you quoted this verse:

1. Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4).
   
   What no good works for salvation? You do have to admit (many Catholics confuse that good works thing with being an additional requirement of salvation) and now that I am a Catholic, I have encountered many Catholics who just don’t get these scripture passages. They run right to the book of James. Answer:

“Salvation is thru Christ Jesus alone”. Good works are proof of “Truly” received salvation thru Christ Jesus. A unit of visible human measurement that humans use to see the working of the Holy Spirit in those who have truley received salvation thru Jesus Christ.

Salvation= Receiving of Jesus Christ as you Lord and Savior (Of course after repenting of your sins, then following thru with baptism after accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior).

Works= Proof of truly received salvation (You are compeled to do this by Holy Spirit. To me it has never been a choice to serve Christ Jesus. I am so compeled by the Holy Spirit sometimes, it makes me go beyond anything I would have even thought of before I rededicated my life to Christ). This is a very good thing. I’m much more open to sharing my faith then before.

The traditions of the Catholic Church outside the Holy Scriptures, I feel are needed, however, I would never place them over God’s Holy inspired words of the Holy Bible. Again, thanks to the Catholic Church for compiling the Holy Bible we enjoy today. Evidently the Catholic Church felt that God’s Holy inspired words were very important as well.

May God Bless!

Ed

P.S. I wish more Catholics were as good at “Evangelism” as you are ma’am. No joke. I’m serious. You would make a great Baptist. Yours in Christ!

 

[PRmerger]

Ma’am,

I always do love your posts. You are always very right to the point with biblical accuracy. It seems you use the Holy Bible quite a bit when pointing out truths of Christian beliefs. I am very surprised that you quoted this verse:

1. Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4).
   
   What no good works for salvation? You do have to admit (many Catholics confuse that good works thing with being an additional requirement of salvation) and now that I am a Catholic, I have encountered many Catholics who just don’t get these scripture passages. They run right to the book of James. Answer:

“Salvation is thru Christ Jesus alone”. Good works are proof of “Truly” received salvation thru Christ Jesus. A unit of visible human measurement that humans use to see the working of the Holy Spirit in those who have truley received salvation thru Jesus Christ.

Salvation= Receiving of Jesus Christ as you Lord and Savior (Of course after repenting of your sins, then following thru with baptism after accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior).

Works= Proof of truly received salvation (You are compeled to do this by Holy Spirit. To me it has never been a choice to serve Christ Jesus. I am so compeled by the Holy Spirit sometimes, it makes me go beyond anything I would have even thought of before I rededicated my life to Christ). This is a very good thing. I’m much more open to sharing my faith then before.

The traditions of the Catholic Church outside the Holy Scriptures, I feel are needed, however, I would never place them over God’s Holy inspired words of the Holy Bible. Again, thanks to the Catholic Church for compiling the Holy Bible we enjoy today. Evidently the Catholic Church felt that God’s Holy inspired words were very important as well.

May God Bless!

Ed

P.S. I wish more Catholics were as good at “Evangelism” as you are ma’am. No joke. I’m serious. You would make a great Baptist. Yours in Christ!

Ed!! Glad to be chatting with you again! :bounce:

Not sure what you’re trying to say about essentials here, though.

And as for your comment: “many Catholics confuse that good works thing with being an additional requirement of salvation”…that sentiment has always puzzled me. I have been a cradle Catholic–with lovely parents who taught me the faith, attended Catholic grade school, all-girls Catholic high school in the 80’s (with nuns who still wore habits!!), all-women’s Catholic college (unfortunately, I became a little influenced by the anti-heirarchy/super-feminist nuns there–who, BTW, did NOT wear habits. I find that speaks volumes), and am now hyper-involved in my parish…and I have NEVER run across a Catholic who said, “I have to pray my rosary in order to be saved” or “I have to attend First Friday Masses so I go to heaven”.

Now, do these Catholics who profess this exist? Probably. But the majority of Catholics have never ever attempted to get into heaven by lighting a candle. And I find that argument tiresome and irrelevant.

 

[guanophore]

And as for your comment:  "many Catholics confuse that good works thing with being an additional  requirement of salvation"...that sentiment has always puzzled me.  I have been a cradle Catholic--with lovely parents who taught me the faith, attended Catholic grade school, all-girls Catholic high school in the 80's (with nuns who still wore  habits!!), all-women's Catholic college (unfortunately, I became a little influenced by the anti-heirarchy/super-feminist nuns there--who, BTW, did NOT wear habits.  I find that speaks volumes), and am now hyper-involved in my parish...and I have NEVER run across a Catholic who said, "I have to pray my rosary in order to be saved" or "I have to attend First Friday Masses so I go to heaven".  :shrug:

Now, do these Catholics who profess this exist? Probably. But the majority of Catholics have never ever attempted to get into heaven by lighting a candle. And I find that argument tiresome and irrelevant.

It is not the good works of devotionals, but the sense that one must have a good character, be of good heart (intentions) and behave in a morally upright manner. If you ask a Catholic how someone might know they are a Christian, they are more likely to say “I try to be a good person”.

Most poorly catechized Catholics misunderstand the command to “work out your own salvation” as something they must do by their own effort an willpower, rather than cooperating with grace, so that what is already in them through the grace of their baptism can work it’s way out.

 

[Dokimas]

There is nothing inherintly wrong with the human imagination. God created it, and He works through it.

It would be good if what you imagine were true, and that everyone did want to be saved but I think we will both agree that this is not the case.

God’s desire for all to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the Truth does not get fulfilled in the lives of some, who reject His purpose for themselves.

you did not respond to my observation that you came to a false conclusion based upon faulty logic. Why is that?

From my humbled position I dare not respond. And even if I could, I would know what you are referring to because you didn’t bring the conversation forward.

 

[dyluck]

Exactly. Since being on the CAFs I have learned from one Protestant poster that this is a list of essentials:

Primary Essentials:

Diety of Christ – John 8:24, John 8:58 + Exodus 3:14.
Salvation by Grace – Gal 5:4, Eph 2:8-9
Resurrection of Christ – 1 Cor 15:14, 1 Cor 15:17
Gospel – Gal 1:8-9, 1 Cor 15:1-4
Monotheism – Exodus 20:3, Isaiah 43:10, 44:6,8, Exodus 20:3-6

Secondary Essentials:

Salvation – John 14:6
Trinity – John 3:16, John 5:26, 1 John 4:10, John 14:26, 15:26, Isaiah 44:24, Gal 3:13, Rom 15:16
Incarnation through Virgin Birth – Matt 1:23, John 8:24

yet another Protestant poster provided a completely different list of essential (with completely different Scripture verses):

“1) Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14; 8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4).
2) Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 15:14).
3) Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4).
4) The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus according to the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9).
5) There is only one God (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)
6) God exists as a Trinity of persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. (1 John 5:7)
7) Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary (nature of incarnation)
8) Jesus is the only way to God the Father (John 14:6).”

and yet another Protestant poster has reduced the list of essentials to (inexplicably) “5 fundamentals”:

The inspiration of the Bible by the Holy Spirit and the inerrancy of Scripture as a result of this.
The virgin birth of Christ.
The belief that Christ’s death was an atonement for sin.
The bodily resurrection of Christ.
The historical reality of Christ’s miracles.

INCIDENTALLY, I noticed that not a single Protestant I cited listed Acts 16: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Nor did they put that it’s an essential to believe that God created the world out of nothing; that we are sinners; that we must forgive others; that we must feed the hungry and clothe the naked;

and…the most egregious oversight IMHO…

that God is LOVE.

However, putting those things as “essential” doctrines is merely my opinion, for there are no Scripture verses that tell us that it is essential to believe that we are sinners, must forgive others, etc etc etc.

The “posters” you quote are basically “statements of faith”. They are there to assit newcommers to get a brief overview of the church’s stance on key items most often debated from denomination to denomintation (including parallel catholic dogmas).
Example of this: the Trinity. Therefore many statements of faith will mention their stance. Baptism of babies is another; therefore, it may make it in the statement of faith etc. Some protestant denominations believe in the relavance of baby baptism and some do not.

There is no “essentials” to salvation ALL scripture is good for exortation and rebuke (2 Tim 3:16-17).
Salvation is a soverign act of God and does not require man.

Jesus says specifically “repent and believe the Gospel”. However, the abililty to repent and believe comes from God. Fundimentally what we are to do is repent and believe. Should it include anything else? All other pieces of scripture and our ability to walk in the spirit comes from the regeneration of our hearts and minds by the holy spirit.

What I don’t understand is, although catholics don’t have defined definitions or seperation in offical denomination, many catholics that I am friends and have spoken to believe sometimes very drastic different things from one another on the same subjects. So, although Catholics claim to one Church belief, they are seperate from parish to parish.
I don’t like that there is so many different denoiminations in the protestant churches and I also believe there is 1 truth and many people practice idolatry by worshiping the wrong God. That said, who can say that Catholics are still worshiping the true God of the bible?

The only thing and I mean the only thing that we have to go on is the Word of God and nothing else. We can look at church history but, hopefully most people know now that the churches of today are much different then they were 1500 years ago.

In so many years, dogmas and sacriments are formed that it turns so much of belief from faith into religion. Meaning something we simply believe by nature and follow to ritual, human governance and moral code.