L
Linkowski
Guest
If I said that a wall was black - you would say that it is white. It is clear to me that you just do not want to see it. You are completely ignoring God’s Word and have lost credibility here.
- Status
M
Milliardo
Guest
Give up, sandusky–you know you can’t win.Great apologetic—be polite, talk in circles, and say it ain’t so.
And…? Oh, I apologize–you have nothing further to add, and just go out and insult. Why am I not surprised?
S
sandusky
Guest
I’m sorry, Milliardo, but you’ve said nothing that supports that. :tiphat:Give up, sandusky–you know you can’t win.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Is that completely fair or accurate?
I have not followed all of this discussion, but it seems to me that if Millardo’s comments are orthodox, then he has 2,000 years of infallible Church teaching backing his position.
The non-Catholic has only his own fallible interpretations of what the Word of God says - or those eisegetical traditions of the men who rebelled against the Church during the unpleasantness of the 16th century.
If you said that a wall was black, I would say, “The Church - through which and to which God gave the Bible - says it is white.”
I would say that by cleaning your non-Catholic lenses, you might wash some of that blackness away. It’s amazing what what can see when the scales are removed from your eyes.
Hope this helps. :tiphat:
S
sandusky
Guest
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
L
Linkowski
Guest
I have to take a break for a while all but I wanted to make one more point. If one is using the commandments as a means of salvation then that person’s love, whether they know it or not is tainted with selfishness…that is the true reality. I have shown very clearly in this thread that one is justified by faith apart fom the works of the law and this includes the keeping of the commendments…This causes us to be free to love with a pure heart…
T
Truthstalker
Guest
The problem is that you think you have shown it very clearly, but a number of people disagree with you. So you have shown it clearly to your own satisfaction, but not to theirs. So you can’t really say you have shown it clearly, because this implies an agreed upon standard of clarity. But there isn’t one.
This demonstrates the need for an ecclesiastical authority that would, among other things, be able to settle this issue. Catholics point to the Magisterium. You point to ???
L
Linkowski
Guest
Ears dull of hearing - eyes dim and not seeing. This is the truth of the matter.
T
Truthstalker
Guest
Both sides can say that of the other. This is no resolution. Aside from saying this, how can it be solved?Ears dull of hearing - eyes dim and not seeing. This is the truth of the matter.
M
Milliardo
Guest
Heh, I actually like that response.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Apart from works of law? Absolutely. This is completely in line with Catholic theology.
We are now under the Covenant of Grace, and there are works we do to respond to God by grace.
Partaking in the sacraments, for example, is a means of receiving the grace that God wants to bestow upon us.
L
Linkowski
Guest
Justified by faith alone…
Now, where the confusion might take place is that scripture clearly shows that we are justified ON THE BASIS OF faith alone…BUT…not by a kind of faith that is alone…this would be the faith spoken of in James 2…
James 2:19 KJV 19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
When Paul is speaking of faith alone…he is speaking of faith apart apart from external obedience to the works of the law including the moral law…the key words are external obedience.
Faith that is alone is dead faith. There is a major difference here, however…The Catholic Church says that Justification is a process which is something that another thread should address.
We are justified by faith alone, but it is the kind of faith that is important…the faith that saves is the gift of God…the faith that comes from God sown in the heart of the believer. The word sown in the good and honest heart as the parable of the sower presents. FAITH ***THAT ***WORKS.
K
kaycee
Guest
That is not biblical Grace. Saving Grace is unmerited favor and is sufficient for salvation. Sacramental grace is merited by the very fact that one must cooporate to receive it. Sacramental grace is never sufficient even after recieving it thousands of times! One can never know the if ones state of grace merits salvation.
Sacramental grace must be channeled through the hands of a priest. In reality RC is a step back into the law.
T
Truthstalker
Guest
Do you have to believe to be saved?
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Faith only huh? Sure can’t tell from the words of Christ Himself.
Matthew 10:38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me.
Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mark 8:34 And calling the multitude together with his disciples, he said to them: If any man will follow me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Luke 9:23 And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
Matthew 10:38 And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me.
Matthew 16:24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Mark 8:34 And calling the multitude together with his disciples, he said to them: If any man will follow me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
Luke 9:23 And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.
S
sandusky
Guest
Church Militant:
All done through faith alone (cf Rom 1:17; Hab 2:4; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38).
T
Truthstalker
Guest
I’m not convinced that this thread isn’t just a misunderstanding.
Faith: 1. Intellectual assent without consequent responsibility
(condemned by both sides)
or
How are people defining the faith they defend and the faith they condemn?
Faith: 1. Intellectual assent without consequent responsibility
(condemned by both sides)
or
Code:
2. Obedient lifestyle as a result of God's work in someone
S
sandusky
Guest
That’s a strawman; no one is forced to repent, but neither can one repent apart from the will of God, and the one that God wills to repent, will repent; and the one that God does not will to repent, will not repent (Dt 29:4; Is 45:9; Mt 11:27; 13:10-11; Jn 6:44, 65, cf with Jn 6:37 notice all that are given will come; Acts 11:18; 13:48; Rom 9:18; Php 1:29).
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Really? That certainly seems to be your interpretation…but not what the Lord says. Especially in Matthew 25:31-46. If I have a choice between the teachings of man and the teachings of Christ Himself… then I reject SS and SF.All done through faith alone (cf Rom 1:17; Hab 2:4; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38).
I don’t really care a whole lot whether you guys agree or not the fact is that there is too much scriptural evidence that heavily contradicts Sola Fide for me to ever believe that again.
I think n-Cs can cherry pick proof texts til hell freezes over and it still won’t hold up for anyone who has actually read the New Testament all the way through. For every proof text you guys supply there are an equal number that refute it and that without having to search very hard, do mental and theological gymnastics and read an interpretation into it. I don’t by it now and I never will again.
You can waste your time on this if you wish, but you’ll never convince those of us who have done all the homework and honestly admit that SF doesn’t hold up in light of the rest of the New Testament. If, as I often hear, “scripture interprets scripture” then SF is dead wrong unless you leave out the rest of the New Testament. All this argument and no sale…hate it for ya.
But knock yourself out…these aren’t dumb Catholics here at CAF.
- Status