Affirming the Beautiful Gifts that Protestants DO have!

Keylem

Copied this from a poster on another Catholic Forum.

I tend to agree!


Despite my occasional doctrinal critiques, I wish NO ill will toward good Protestant Christians. They in many ways give such greater witness to God's love than some many Catholics who disgrace God by their lukewarmness or even blatant defiance of morals that are clearly wrong even from the BIBLE, let alone Catholic teaching.Now, the Catholic Church believes that Jesus can save a baby though, and give it grace before it knows anything, in baptism. But the baby might grow up and not raised or taught to love Jesus, in which case they eventually lose that salvation. But I agree that if someone never was Baptized, and they come to repentance, absolutely, they need to repent to be able to receive the Holy Spirit. Although, in the Catholic faith, when they repent and place faith in Jesus, that is like getting ENGAGED to Jesus, but they don't MARRY Jesus till Baptism. But if they die before baptism through no fault of their own, then Jesus can give them grace in a special sense. And I believe that if a baby is baptized but grows up to never know Jesus cuz the parents never teach it right, or if it falls away of its sin, they can be reconciled to Jesus, by repentance. For a Catholic, that could happen immediately if they are perfectly sorry for everything and love God. Or if they are only afraid of Hell, but not yet perfect love, they would need to go to confession to be restored to Jesus.

But we rejoice in what we have in common with our separated brothers and sisters.

Bottom line for a Catholic: only those that, moved by God's grace, seek to know, love and serve God and neighbor, by His saving power, can in the end be given the free gift of heaven. And faith in Jesus is necessary for those who culpably know of Him.

Also, I will say, Baptism or the desire for it is the only thing that is necessary for Salvation.

A good Christian who is not Catholic is still pleasing to Jesus if they follow their conscience. In our Catholic belief, we believe that Protestant Christians usually have valid Baptism and Marriage as sacraments, even if they don't believe that Marriage is a Sacrament. We believe that ANY baptized Christian who takes a spouse is living in the real symbolism of Jesus and His Bride and so is given those special graces throughout their whole lives in a real SACRAMENT, and that every time this loving man and woman come together in the most intimate act of Marriage, relations, they are RENEWING the marriage covenant!

That is why the Catechism rejoices in the salvation that Jesus pours out in the Protestant communities through baptism, the Holy Bible, and the holy marriages therefrom. We are trying to move closer together and use what wonderful love of God and graces and truth we have in common to work together to bring this fallen away world back to Jesus and His Love, so that salvation may be restored.

We have a common enemy, and it is this apostate world that does not care about God in ANY sense, and that doesn't even care about what is true in religion or to obey it. Living in sex promiscuity, killing the babies they don't want from this, killing the elderly because they don't want to sacrifice to take care of them, living for vain amusements like sports and video games and immoral music, instead of living to love God. Being materialistic, heaping up debts from things they haven't worked for, and not giving to Church and the poor.

The world needs Jesus and God more than ever, and God bless you, holy Bible Christians, we are coming together as Christians to work for renewal!


Sadly, the Catholic Church in the West parts of culture has done a real poor job of teaching their children the faith. Very poor formation. Sadly, alot of Catholics as consequence are like "baptized non-believers", in that they are practically pagans. They live together in sin before marriage, don't really care about loving God, and just treat their faith like a hobby. That is why, I rejoice that so many good Protestant Christians are such a better disciple of Jesus in their total and personal relationship with Jesus, their strong desire to read and understand the Bible as best as they can, and to always seek God's loving help to be faithful to what they believe they find.

They really put the majority of Catholics in this country to SHAME! I would rather live in a house of devout and holy and loving Protestants with whom I disagree on some doctrines than live with "Catholics" who don't care about God and would rather watch sports than pray or learn about God!

tfitzgerald

I'm fairly sure there are protestant's who don't care about God and would rather watch sports than pray or learn about God! As well out there as a matter of fact I know a few

AhSureTisGrand

What do you consider "immoral music"?

antiskeptic

Interested in how the Roman Catholic position holds itself together, permit a dissection.

Now, the Catholic Church believes that Jesus can save a baby though, and give it grace before it knows anything, in baptism. But the baby might grow up and not raised or taught to love Jesus, in which case they eventually lose that salvation.

Okay. Potential-for-salvation through baptism + something else (commonly known as works) in life = Final, eternal Salvation

But I agree that if someone never was Baptized, and they come to repentance, absolutely, they need to repent to be able to receive the Holy Spirit. Although, in the Catholic faith, when they repent and place faith in Jesus, that is like getting ENGAGED to Jesus, but they don't MARRY Jesus till Baptism. But if they die before baptism through no fault of their own, then Jesus can give them grace in a special sense.

So baptism isn't necessary for final salvation (which would tie in with the idea that unbaptised infants who die might well end up being saved)

And I believe that if a baby is baptized but grows up to never know Jesus cuz the parents never teach it right, or if it falls away of its sin, they can be reconciled to Jesus, by repentance. For a Catholic, that could happen immediately if they are perfectly sorry for everything and love God. Or if they are only afraid of Hell, but not yet perfect love, they would need to go to confession to be restored to Jesus.

Back to baptism + something else

But we rejoice in what we have in common with our separated brothers and sisters.

The feeling isn't necessarily mutual. But I digress..

Bottom line for a Catholic: only those that, moved by God's grace, seek to know, love and serve God and neighbor, by His saving power, can in the end be given the free gift of heaven. And faith in Jesus is necessary for those who culpably know of Him.

Also, I will say, Baptism or the desire for it is the only thing that is necessary for Salvation.

Yet in this same post we are told that:

- baptism + something is required for salvation. The 'something else' allowing to to hang on to the salvation provided by baptism.

- baptism isn't required for salvation. That Jesus can save without it.

- now we are told that baptism is the only thing required for salvation.

These are apparently mutually exclusive statements.

That is why the Catechism rejoices in the salvation that Jesus pours out in the Protestant communities through baptism, the Holy Bible, and the holy marriages therefrom. We are trying to move closer together and use what wonderful love of God and graces and truth we have in common to work together to bring this fallen away world back to Jesus and His Love, so that salvation may be restored.

Fair enough. But not ecumenism at any price.

We have a common enemy, and it is this apostate world that does not care about God in ANY sense, and that doesn't even care about what is true in religion or to obey it. Living in sex promiscuity, killing the babies they don't want from this, killing the elderly because they don't want to sacrifice to take care of them, living for vain amusements like sports and video games and immoral music, instead of living to love God. Being materialistic, heaping up debts from things they haven't worked for, and not giving to Church and the poor.

The common enemy is satan. The apostate world consists of people who are sailing in precisely the same boat as I sailed in before I was found.

See how polar opposite our views are. I can't for the life of me see anything necessarily wrong with sport or video games either.

The world needs Jesus and God more than ever, and God bless you, holy Bible Christians, we are coming together as Christians to work for renewal!

..

Sadly, the Catholic Church in the West parts of culture has done a real poor job of teaching their children the faith. Very poor formation. Sadly, alot of Catholics as consequence are like "baptized non-believers", in that they are practically pagans. They live together in sin before marriage, don't really care about loving God, and just treat their faith like a hobby. That is why, I rejoice that so many good Protestant Christians are such a better disciple of Jesus in their total and personal relationship with Jesus, their strong desire to read and understand the Bible as best as they can, and to always seek God's loving help to be faithful to what they believe they find.

Do I detect One True Church in there

They really put the majority of Catholics in this country to SHAME! I would rather live in a house of devout and holy and loving Protestants with whom I disagree on some doctrines than live with "Catholics" who don't care about God and would rather watch sports than pray or learn about God!

I'm off down the pub to watch the match on Sky Sports

Keylem

antiskeptic wrote: »

Yet in this same post we are told that:

- baptism + something is required for salvation. The 'something else' allowing to to hang on to the salvation provided by baptism.

- baptism isn't required for salvation. That Jesus can save without it.

- now we are told that baptism is the only thing required for salvation.

Baptism of Desire.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Necessity_of_Baptism.aspYet

Christians have also always realized that the necessity of water baptism is a normative rather than an absolute necessity. There are exceptions to water baptism: It is possible to be saved through "baptism of blood," martyrdom for Christ, or through "baptism of desire", that is, an explicit or even implicit desire for baptism.

antiskeptic

Keylem wrote: »

Baptism of Desire.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Necessity_of_Baptism.aspYet

Christians have also always realized that the necessity of water baptism is a normative rather than an absolute necessity. There are exceptions to water baptism: It is possible to be saved through "baptism of blood," martyrdom for Christ, or through "baptism of desire", that is, an explicit or even implicit desire for baptism.

Gotcha. Water baptism isn't required for salvation.

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

Gotcha. Water baptism isn't required for salvation.

It is the ordinary means and we would be remiss to neglect what has been given by God - the Sacrament of Baptism. God is not bound by his sacraments, but we are bound to use them and to further the mission of the Church.

hinault

Keylem wrote: »

Copied this from a poster on another Catholic Forum.

I tend to agree!


Despite my occasional doctrinal critiques, I wish NO ill will toward good Protestant Christians. They in many ways give such greater witness to God's love than some many Catholics who disgrace God by their lukewarmness or even blatant defiance of morals that are clearly wrong even from the BIBLE, let alone Catholic teaching.Now, the Catholic Church believes that Jesus can save a baby though, and give it grace before it knows anything, in baptism. But the baby might grow up and not raised or taught to love Jesus, in which case they eventually lose that salvation. But I agree that if someone never was Baptized, and they come to repentance, absolutely, they need to repent to be able to receive the Holy Spirit. Although, in the Catholic faith, when they repent and place faith in Jesus, that is like getting ENGAGED to Jesus, but they don't MARRY Jesus till Baptism. But if they die before baptism through no fault of their own, then Jesus can give them grace in a special sense. And I believe that if a baby is baptized but grows up to never know Jesus cuz the parents never teach it right, or if it falls away of its sin, they can be reconciled to Jesus, by repentance. For a Catholic, that could happen immediately if they are perfectly sorry for everything and love God. Or if they are only afraid of Hell, but not yet perfect love, they would need to go to confession to be restored to Jesus.

But we rejoice in what we have in common with our separated brothers and sisters.

Bottom line for a Catholic: only those that, moved by God's grace, seek to know, love and serve God and neighbor, by His saving power, can in the end be given the free gift of heaven. And faith in Jesus is necessary for those who culpably know of Him.

Also, I will say, Baptism or the desire for it is the only thing that is necessary for Salvation.

A good Christian who is not Catholic is still pleasing to Jesus if they follow their conscience. In our Catholic belief, we believe that Protestant Christians usually have valid Baptism and Marriage as sacraments, even if they don't believe that Marriage is a Sacrament. We believe that ANY baptized Christian who takes a spouse is living in the real symbolism of Jesus and His Bride and so is given those special graces throughout their whole lives in a real SACRAMENT, and that every time this loving man and woman come together in the most intimate act of Marriage, relations, they are RENEWING the marriage covenant!

That is why the Catechism rejoices in the salvation that Jesus pours out in the Protestant communities through baptism, the Holy Bible, and the holy marriages therefrom. We are trying to move closer together and use what wonderful love of God and graces and truth we have in common to work together to bring this fallen away world back to Jesus and His Love, so that salvation may be restored.

We have a common enemy, and it is this apostate world that does not care about God in ANY sense, and that doesn't even care about what is true in religion or to obey it. Living in sex promiscuity, killing the babies they don't want from this, killing the elderly because they don't want to sacrifice to take care of them, living for vain amusements like sports and video games and immoral music, instead of living to love God. Being materialistic, heaping up debts from things they haven't worked for, and not giving to Church and the poor.

The world needs Jesus and God more than ever, and God bless you, holy Bible Christians, we are coming together as Christians to work for renewal!


Sadly, the Catholic Church in the West parts of culture has done a real poor job of teaching their children the faith. Very poor formation. Sadly, alot of Catholics as consequence are like "baptized non-believers", in that they are practically pagans. They live together in sin before marriage, don't really care about loving God, and just treat their faith like a hobby. That is why, I rejoice that so many good Protestant Christians are such a better disciple of Jesus in their total and personal relationship with Jesus, their strong desire to read and understand the Bible as best as they can, and to always seek God's loving help to be faithful to what they believe they find.

They really put the majority of Catholics in this country to SHAME! I would rather live in a house of devout and holy and loving Protestants with whom I disagree on some doctrines than live with "Catholics" who don't care about God and would rather watch sports than pray or learn about God!

I have met with many Protestants throughout my life - through work and through my extended family and I have always been impressed with their honesty, directness and fairness.
My English grandmother was born and raised as a Protestant but she later converted to Roman Catholicism and married my grandfather so I have a lot of Protestant relatives and being with them makes for interesting comparison.

I've always had a deep respect for many of our Protestant brethren and their advocacy on many issues of social injustice such as slavery in the 19th century and other movements such as the Salvation Army.

This is a great thread and thanks for posting it keylem.

Jarndyce

Keylem wrote: »

We have a common enemy, and it is this apostate world that does not care about God in ANY sense, and that doesn't even care about what is true in religion or to obey it.

You are my enemy, also. And I abhor your brainwashed irrational beliefs.

Some interesting phrases there: "what is true in religion" - pray tell what you know to be true rather than merely believe to be true.

Also, "to obey it". That encapsulates your life right there. Mental serfdom. Servility of the most reprehensible kind.

anymore

Keylem wrote: »

Copied this from a poster on another Catholic Forum.

I tend to agree!


Despite my occasional doctrinal critiques, I wish NO ill will toward good Protestant Christians. They in many ways give such greater witness to God's love than some many Catholics who disgrace God by their lukewarmness or even blatant defiance of morals that are clearly wrong even from the BIBLE, let alone Catholic teaching.Now, the Catholic Church believes that Jesus can save a baby though, and give it grace before it knows anything, in baptism. But the baby might grow up and not raised or taught to love Jesus, in which case they eventually lose that salvation. But I agree that if someone never was Baptized, and they come to repentance, absolutely, they need to repent to be able to receive the Holy Spirit. Although, in the Catholic faith, when they repent and place faith in Jesus, that is like getting ENGAGED to Jesus, but they don't MARRY Jesus till Baptism. But if they die before baptism through no fault of their own, then Jesus can give them grace in a special sense. And I believe that if a baby is baptized but grows up to never know Jesus cuz the parents never teach it right, or if it falls away of its sin, they can be reconciled to Jesus, by repentance. For a Catholic, that could happen immediately if they are perfectly sorry for everything and love God. Or if they are only afraid of Hell, but not yet perfect love, they would need to go to confession to be restored to Jesus.

But we rejoice in what we have in common with our separated brothers and sisters.

Bottom line for a Catholic: only those that, moved by God's grace, seek to know, love and serve God and neighbor, by His saving power, can in the end be given the free gift of heaven. And faith in Jesus is necessary for those who culpably know of Him.

Also, I will say, Baptism or the desire for it is the only thing that is necessary for Salvation.

A good Christian who is not Catholic is still pleasing to Jesus if they follow their conscience. In our Catholic belief, we believe that Protestant Christians usually have valid Baptism and Marriage as sacraments, even if they don't believe that Marriage is a Sacrament. We believe that ANY baptized Christian who takes a spouse is living in the real symbolism of Jesus and His Bride and so is given those special graces throughout their whole lives in a real SACRAMENT, and that every time this loving man and woman come together in the most intimate act of Marriage, relations, they are RENEWING the marriage covenant!

That is why the Catechism rejoices in the salvation that Jesus pours out in the Protestant communities through baptism, the Holy Bible, and the holy marriages therefrom. We are trying to move closer together and use what wonderful love of God and graces and truth we have in common to work together to bring this fallen away world back to Jesus and His Love, so that salvation may be restored.

We have a common enemy, and it is this apostate world that does not care about God in ANY sense, and that doesn't even care about what is true in religion or to obey it. Living in sex promiscuity, killing the babies they don't want from this, killing the elderly because they don't want to sacrifice to take care of them, living for vain amusements like sports and video games and immoral music, instead of living to love God. Being materialistic, heaping up debts from things they haven't worked for, and not giving to Church and the poor.

The world needs Jesus and God more than ever, and God bless you, holy Bible Christians, we are coming together as Christians to work for renewal!


Sadly, the Catholic Church in the West parts of culture has done a real poor job of teaching their children the faith. Very poor formation. Sadly, alot of Catholics as consequence are like "baptized non-believers", in that they are practically pagans. They live together in sin before marriage, don't really care about loving God, and just treat their faith like a hobby. That is why, I rejoice that so many good Protestant Christians are such a better disciple of Jesus in their total and personal relationship with Jesus, their strong desire to read and understand the Bible as best as they can, and to always seek God's loving help to be faithful to what they believe they find.

They really put the majority of Catholics in this country to SHAME! I would rather live in a house of devout and holy and loving Protestants with whom I disagree on some doctrines than live with "Catholics" who don't care about God and would rather watch sports than pray or learn about God!

Can I point out that before their very recent marriage , that one of the future heads of the Church of England had been cohabiting with his bride to be for some period before their marraige and that this Prince's father, the next Head of the Church of England has been in almost continuous adulterous relationshiop for the period of his marraige to Diana ?

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

It is the ordinary means and we would be remiss to neglect what has been given by God - the Sacrament of Baptism. God is not bound by his sacraments, but we are bound to use them and to further the mission of the Church.

Which doesn't alter my conclusion right? Baptism isn't necessarily mission critical for salvation.

I gather RC doesn't know what actually produces a sure salvation. Is it the case that baptism, like works, is something that is felt to improve the odds in each individuals case?

You being "remiss" in neglecting baptism has two strands, one irrelevant to the discussion (i.e. how your being remiss comes to impact on you personally) and one relevant to the discussion (i.e. how your being remiss affects others). Are you saying that your decisions have a bearing on the chances of another person (a baby for example) being saved ultimately? That your failing to baptise a baby could disimprove it's chances of salvation?

hinault

Jarndyce wrote: »

You are my enemy, also. And I abhor your brainwashed irrational beliefs.

And I your irrationality.

antiskeptic

anymore wrote: »

Can I point out that before their very recent marriage , that one of the future heads of the Church of England had been cohabiting with his bride to be for some period before their marraige and that this Prince's father, the next Head of the Church of England has been in almost continuous adulterous relationshiop for the period of his marraige to Diana ?

Indeed. In slamming culchural Christianity in Ireland, Keylem forgets cultchral religion exists everywhere.

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

I gather RC doesn't know what actually produces a sure salvation. Is it the case that baptism, like works, is something that is felt to improve the odds in each individuals case?

Are you saying that your decisions have a bearing on the chances of another person (a baby for example) being saved ultimately? That your failing to baptise a baby could disimprove it's chances of salvation?

I think the RCC knows what it believes. If a baby is baptised, we have the certainty of faith that should the baby die, he/she goes straight to heaven.

Baptism is the ordinary means to heaven. The problem comes after the baptism, when we fail to love perfectly and end up worse than we started by failing to keep our baptismal promises. For this, we need God's grace, and when we fail, His mercy and forgiveness.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

I think the RCC knows what it believes. If a baby is baptised, we have the certainty of faith that should the baby die, he/she goes straight to heaven.

..whereas if they are not baptised they might or might not go to heaven. In other words, this..

antiskeptic wrote:

Are you saying that your decisions have a bearing on the chances of another person (a baby for example) being saved ultimately? That your failing to baptise a baby could disimprove it's chances of salvation?

..is the case?

Baptism is the ordinary means to heaven The problem comes after the baptism, when we fail to love perfectly and end up worse than we started by failing to keep our baptismal promises. For this, we need God's grace, and when we fail, His mercy and forgiveness.

An aside: the infant didn't make any baptismal promises so how can they fail to keep them?

To summerise what I understand to be the case so far

Infant baptised will certainly go to heaven if it dies
Infant not baptised may or may not go to heaven if it dies

> baptism a possible advantage in infancy (but how much an advantage, if any, not known for want of knowing whether all unbaptised infants go to heaven)


Adult baptised may or may not go to heaven when he dies
Adult not baptised may or may not go to heaven when he dies

> does baptism confer an advantage in these may/may not cases? And if so, how much?

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

..whereas if they are not baptised they might or might not go to heaven. In other words, this..

..is the case?

An aside: the infant didn't make any baptismal promises so how can they fail to keep them?

To summerise what I understand to be the case so far

Infant baptised will certainly go to heaven if it dies
Infant not baptised may or may not go to heaven if it dies

> baptism a possible advantage in infancy (but how much an advantage, if any, not known for want of knowing whether all unbaptised infants go to heaven)

Adult baptised may or may not go to heaven when he dies
Adult not baptised may or may not go to heaven when he dies

> does baptism confer an advantage in these may/may not cases? And if so, how much?

There are many things we don't know. All we know is what God told us so we do that. The rest we leave to His mercy.

When a person is baptised, they are a new creation. The role of the Christian is to grow in holiness and to keep their baptismal garments lean by following Christ and His Commandments. If we fall, we have recourse to the Sacrament of Penance. We gain strength for the journey through prayer and the Eucharist.

I can see the appeal of your creed Anti-skeptic, but it fails to respect the fact that God wants our co-operation and, heaven forbid, effort to work out our salvation in fear and trembling, with His grace meeting all our needs sufficiently. "He who created us without our help will not save us without our consent." We must persevere 'til the end in order to be saved.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

There are many things we don't know. All we know is what God told us so we do that. The rest we leave to His mercy.

It seems to me that if you don't know then you shouldn't make statements as if you do know. "God instructs infant baptism" (you say) is not the same as "infant baptism necessary for salvation".

When a person is baptised, they are a new creation. The role (i.e. work) of the Christian is to grow in holiness and to keep their baptismal garments lean by following Christ and His Commandments. If we fall, we have recourse to the Sacrament of Penance. We gain strength for the journey through prayer and the Eucharist.

And if you fail badly enough / don't work enough you won't be saved

I can see the appeal of your creed Anti-skeptic, but it fails to respect the fact that God wants our co-operation and, heaven forbid, effort to work out our salvation in fear and trembling, with His grace meeting all our needs sufficiently. "He who created us without our help will not save us without our consent." We must persevere 'til the end in order to be saved.

And I can see the appeal of your creed. It's an appeal that is common to every single world religion and sect there ever was and ever will be.

"I must work for my salvation. I must put in effort to get it."

Quite how you work out your salvation when it isn't actually yours yet leads me to suspect your interpretation. I've never heard of owning something that wasn't actually mine. Or being given a gift that can be taken away again if I don't use it in the way demanded of me.

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

It seems to me that if you don't know then you shouldn't make statements as if you do know. "God instructs infant baptism" (you say) is not the same as "infant baptism necessary for salvation".

And if you fail badly enough / don't work enough you won't be saved

And I can see the appeal of your creed. It's an appeal that is common to every single world religion and sect there ever was and ever will be.

"I must work for my salvation. I must put in effort to get it."

Quite how you work out your salvation when it isn't actually yours yet leads me to suspect your interpretation. I've never heard of owning something that wasn't actually mine. Or being given a gift that can be taken away again if I don't use it in the way demanded of me.

''But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.''

So there you are. You have to do some work in order to be saved. You must forgive others or else God won't forgive you.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

''But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.''

So there you are. You have to do some work in order to be saved. You must forgive others or else God won't forgive you.

I'm in no way doubting you can scour the Bible for contect-lacking snippets from which to hang your doctrine. I'm more concerned with confirmation of your working for your salvation. As I say:

I can see the appeal of your creed. It's an appeal that is common to every single world religion and sect there ever was and ever will be.

"I must work for my salvation. I must put in effort to get it."

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'm in no way doubting you can scour the Bible for contect-lacking snippets from which to hang your doctrine. I'm more concerned with confirmation of your working for your salvation. As I say:

What's lacking in context? Seems simple to me: you don't forgive me for my offences against you, then God doesn't forgive you your offences against Him. Sounds like God wants you to do a bit of work.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

What's lacking in context? Seems simple to me: you don't forgive me for my offences against you, then God doesn't forgive you your offences against Him. Sounds like God wants you to do a bit of work.

Everything is simple when you chop it up into bite-size. Which is kind of how RC theology seems to work:

- you are Peter
- whole household baptised
- faith without works is dead
- eat my body, drink my blood

..massive doctrine rested on pinpricks of scripture.


My point however, was that there is nothing unique in this 'creed' of yours. The world is awash with working for a favourable outcome before the god in question. Does that not strike Roman Catholics as somewhat strange? That there isn't anything fundamentally different about their God?

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

Everything is simple when you chop it up into bite-size. Which is kind of how RC theology seems to work:

- you are Peter
- whole household baptised
- faith without works is dead
- eat my body, drink my blood

..massive doctrine rested on pinpricks of scripture.


My point however, was that there is nothing unique in this 'creed' of yours. The world is awash with working for a favourable outcome before the god in question. Does that not strike Roman Catholics as somewhat strange? That there isn't anything fundamentally different about their God?

You dodge the question again. If forgiveness is a work and you must forgive me or God will not forgive you then...

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

You dodge the question again. If forgiveness is a work and you must forgive me or God will not forgive you then...

What part of "I don't derive my doctrine from chopped up snippets of context-less scripture thrun together to form oft-times literalistic and inevitably simplistic word salad"

..do you not understand?


My apologies for the severe language Donnatello. but it is a core point seemingly in need of underlining for you.

homer911

Donatello wrote: »

When a person is baptised, they are a new creation.

I dont think any protestant denomination subscribes to this teaching.

We are a new creation when we are born again. Baptism is not being born again. Adult baptism is an outward sign/symbol of that inner transformation - a declaration to the world!

Donatello

homer911 wrote: »

I dont think any protestant denomination subscribes to this teaching.

We are a new creation when we are born again. Baptism is not being born again. Adult baptism is an outward sign/symbol of that inner transformation - a declaration to the world!

We are born again in baptism. That is what Catholics believe.

Your own understanding of baptism is very similar if not the same as the Council of Trent's.

Sacraments are outward signs of inward grace, instituted by Christ for our sanctification.
- Catechismus concil. Trident., n. 4

That is the Catholic teaching on what a sacrament is.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote:

What's lacking in context?

..If forgiveness is a work and you must forgive me or God will not forgive you then...

Seeing as we are to disregard context (for none is given in the verse you supply) could you tell me whether the forgiveness referred to by Jesus here has to do with:

- forgiveness in a penal sense, that is; forgiveness of a debt legally owed

OR

- forgiveness in a relational sense, that is; the restoration of broken, personal relationship to it's former intimate status.

OR

- both of the above.


..because if it's only the latter being referred to by Jesus then the work done in forgiving others their sin hasn't necessarily anything to do with salvation. Lacking a salvation context in the text we cannot exegetically assume one.

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

Seeing as we are to disregard context (for none is given in the verse you supply) could you tell me whether the forgiveness referred to by Jesus here has to do with:

- forgiveness in a penal sense, that is; forgiveness of a debt legally owed

OR

- forgiveness in a relational sense, that is; the restoration of broken, personal relationship to it's former intimate status.

OR

- both of the above.


..because if it's only the latter being referred to by Jesus then the work done in forgiving others their sin hasn't necessarily anything to do with salvation. Lacking a salvation context in the text we cannot exegetically assume one.

It doesn't actually matter. As far as you are concerned, you must do the work of forgiveness of me, your brother, otherwise God won't forgive you your sins. Whatever it is the verse refers to, there is something you have to do in order for God to forgive you. That's a work in your book.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

It doesn't actually matter. As far as you are concerned, you must do the work of forgiveness of me, your brother, otherwise God won't forgive you your sins. Whatever it is the verse refers to, there is something you have to do in order for God to forgive you. That's a work in your book.

If the forgiveness from God - on account of my work in forgiving others - doesn't relate to the forgiveness required for salvation then it does actually matter. I could fail to forgive and it wouldn't have any bearing on my salvation.

Contrary to..

Donatello wrote:

So there you are. You have to do some work in order to be saved. You must forgive others or else God won't forgive you.

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

If the forgiveness from God - on account of my work in forgiving others - doesn't relate to the forgiveness required for salvation then it does actually matter. I could fail to forgive and it wouldn't have any bearing on my salvation.

Contrary to..

You are tying yourself in knots Anti-skeptic.

Your reasoning goes against the clear meaning of Scripture. I would refer you to Matthew 18:21-35. If you do not forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will not forgive you your trespasses.

BTW, any sins you fail to forgive others for, that unforgiveness will have to be burned out of you in purgatory. I know you don't believe in that, but I'm just sayin'. Whatever way you look at it, God requires that only what is perfect enters heaven, so any hardness of heart, imperfection in charity, or unforgiveness must be dealt with first.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

You are tying yourself in knots Anti-skeptic.

I doubt you'll say anything of substance to support this. But let's look anyway..

Your reasoning goes against the clear meaning of Scripture.

I haven't reasoned anything yet. I've merely pointed to various facets of 'forgiveness' not all of which need be salvation related. Your position is like the atheist who gleefully points to God describing himself as a "jealous God". As if the only kind of jealously was the green-eyed-monster type.

Before you reason, you open out the word to have a look see.

I would refer you to Matthew 18:21-35. If you do not forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will not forgive you your trespasses.

Could you begin to build your case by actually posting the specific piece of contextually relevant scripture which supports your opinion as to this verses meaning? The verse itself doesn't indicate either way.

Assuming you don't (rigorous, sustained defence of your claims not being your habit), I'll conclude hollow bluster in the knot-tying dept.

antiskeptic

antiskeptic wrote:

Assuming you don't (rigorous, sustained defence of your claims not being your habit), I'll conclude hollow bluster in the knot-tying dept.

Going once..

Slav

antiskeptic wrote: »

Seeing as we are to disregard context (for none is given in the verse you supply) could you tell me whether the forgiveness referred to by Jesus here has to do with:

- forgiveness in a penal sense, that is; forgiveness of a debt legally owed

OR

- forgiveness in a relational sense, that is; the restoration of broken, personal relationship to it's former intimate status.

OR

- both of the above.


..because if it's only the latter being referred to by Jesus then the work done in forgiving others their sin hasn't necessarily anything to do with salvation. Lacking a salvation context in the text we cannot exegetically assume one.

Interesting observation. While you are waiting for Donatello, would mind educate me about Western soteriology please? To be honest I'm struggling to comprehend it when it getting to that level of details...

Specifically, are you saying that it's possible to be justified before God but at the same time be unforgiven by God in the sense that the personal relationships between the justified and God are not restored? Do those people constitute some distinct caste of saints? Any references to further reading on this issue would be very much appreciated as well!

antiskeptic

Slav wrote: »

Interesting observation. While you are waiting for Donatello..

It will be a long wait I fear..

Specifically, are you saying that it's possible to be justified before God but at the same time be unforgiven by God in the sense that the personal relationships between the justified and God are not restored?

I wouldn't use the word restored. Relationship restored strikes me as better belonging to the category of once-off canyon-bridging activity that takes place on a person being born again. Justified, restored, made a child of God, granted eternal life .. and the like.

Better said: I would suggest the unbreakable personal relationship distanced by sin. And that distance remaining in the face of unrepented sin.

Any references to further reading on this issue would be very much appreciated as well!

Psalm 51?

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+51&version=NIV

The repentant David exhibiting the countenance of a man of God deprived of God's intimate presence, a man not at all experiencing the sense of being washed whiter than white by God's forgiveness.

Would you agree he stands at this point, a man unforgiven?

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

It will be a long wait I fear..

I can hear blackbirds singing outside. It's 4:40am.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Psalm 51?

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+51&version=NIV

The repentant David exhibiting the countenance of a man of God deprived of God's intimate presence, a man not at all experiencing the sense of being washed whiter than white by God's forgiveness.

Would you agree he stands at this point, a man unforgiven?

My fallible opinion is that Psalm 51 is an example of perfect contrition.

Have mercy on me, O God

- A plea for mercy, obviously.

Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight;
so you are right in your verdict
and justified when you judge.

- A confession of sin and recognition that sin is primarily an offense against the good God, with an acknowledgement of the negative personal effects of sin.

Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean;
wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.

- A desire for God to clean him: a request for forgiveness.

Create in me a pure heart, O God,
and renew a steadfast spirit within me.
Do not cast me from your presence
or take your Holy Spirit from me.
Restore to me the joy of your salvation
and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

- Expresses a firm purpose of amendment.

Then I will teach transgressors your ways,
so that sinners will turn back to you.

- Again, the firm purpose of amendment and desire to reform one's life.

My sacrifice, O God, is a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart
you, God, will not despise.

- Contrition = a sorrowful heart. This seems like perfect contrition to me, but I could be wrong.

Then you will delight in the sacrifices of the righteous,

- Penance?

Thank you Anti-skeptic. I never thought of Psalm 51 in this way. Though I knew it was a good Psalm to pray when sorry for one's sins, I hadn't realised that it really contains all the elements from the Catholic Act of Contrition:

O my God,
I am heartily sorry for
having offended Thee,
and I detest all my sins,
because I dread the loss of heaven,
and the pains of hell;
but most of all because
they offend Thee, my God,
Who are all good and
deserving of all my love.
I firmly resolve,
with the help of Thy grace,
to confess my sins,
to do penance,
and to amend my life.
Amen.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

I can hear blackbirds singing outside. It's 4:40am.

Blessings indeed.

-

Going twice..

homer911

Donatello wrote: »

I can hear blackbirds singing outside. It's 4:40am.

This would be the dead of night of course...

Donatello

antiskeptic:

Your signature:

If you are fighting sin, you are alive. Take heart. But if sin holds sway unopposed then you are dead no matter how lively this sin makes you feel. Take heart, embattled saint! - John Piper

What happens if you, the embattled saint, die, dead in sin?

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

antiskeptic: Your signature:
What happens if you, the embattled saint, die, dead in sin?

It's not possible that I die so. My being dead in sin was a status left behind for once and for all at the point of my being born again (at 38 years old).

As for my sig - I can't conceive of sin holding sway in me unopposed - the misery would become too intense to bear.
Gone?

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

It's not possible that I die so. My being dead in sin was a status left behind for once and for all at the point of my being born again (at 38 years old).

As for my sig - I can't conceive of sin holding sway in me unopposed - the misery would become too intense to bear.
Gone?

Look at what Mr Piper said:

If you are fighting sin, you are alive. Take heart. But if sin holds sway unopposed then you are dead no matter how lively this sin makes you feel. Take heart, embattled saint! - John Piper

So, the embattled saint battles. But then he loses, gives in to sin, gets miffed, and dies in his sin. You seem to be suggesting that the embattled saint could not die in his sin, unrepentant.

It's my understanding that we must persevere to the end if we are to be saved. I'm just wondering what happens to your embattled saint if he gets tired out and gives in to sin, unopposed.

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

Look at what Mr Piper said:

If you are fighting sin, you are alive. Take heart. But if sin holds sway unopposed then you are dead no matter how lively this sin makes you feel. Take heart, embattled saint! - John Piper

So, the embattled saint battles. But then he loses, gives in to sin, gets miffed, and dies in his sin. You seem to be suggesting that the embattled saint could not die in his sin, unrepentant.

It's my understanding that we must persevere to the end if we are to be saved. I'm just wondering what happens to your embattled saint if he gets tired out and gives in to sin, unopposed.

First things first.

You asked what would happen if I die "dead in sin". Biblically speaking, "dead in sin" is an expression used by Paul in Ephesians in the sense of a past time. He is understood by 'Protestants' to be referring to the time when we (Christians) were lost. The status of being dead in sin (whilst alive in the physical sense) isn't one that applies, or can apply, to us (Christians) anymore.

I cannot die "dead in sin" sin I have been transferred irrevocibly out from under that status. it is impossible - says the 'Protestant' view.

Ephesians 2. 1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.



As for Mr. Piper?

If you are fighting sin, you are alive. Take heart.


But if sin holds sway unopposed then you are dead no matter how lively this sin makes you feel.

Take heart, embattled saint!

There are a number of ways to view what Piper says. The chief way is to read it as an encouragment to believers. I, per definition, will be fighting and struggling with sin. But I can get to feeling beaten and downtrodden and miserable in that fight. I find the same sin coming back at me time and again - and I can get dispirited, forgetting that I'm promised that I will have trouble, forgetting that the battle with sin will rage my whole life long. I can get to believing the lies of the enemy which tell me that I'm really no good, really not able to resist .. and from there, that God isn't really on my side.

I need to remember, says John Piper, that the very fact of my struggling, the very fact of movement in me is a sign of the life of God within. Indeed, the more desparate the struggle, the more certainty there is of the life of God pulsating through my veins.

How you read John will depend very much on your theology. A bit like the Bible really

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

First things first.

You asked what would happen if I die "dead in sin". Biblically speaking, "dead in sin" is an expression used by Paul in Ephesians in the sense of a past time. He is understood by 'Protestants' to be referring to the time when we (Christians) were lost. The status of being dead in sin (whilst alive in the physical sense) isn't one that applies, or can apply, to us (Christians) anymore.

I cannot die "dead in sin" sin I have been transferred irrevocibly out from under that status. it is impossible - says the 'Protestant' view.

Ephesians 2. 1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.



As for Mr. Piper?




There are a number of ways to view what Piper says. The chief way is to read it as an encouragment to believers. I, per definition, will be fighting and struggling with sin. But I can get to feeling beaten and downtrodden and miserable in that fight. I find the same sin coming back at me time and again - and I can get dispirited, forgetting that I'm promised that I will have trouble, forgetting that the battle with sin will rage my whole life long. I can get to believing the lies of the enemy which tell me that I'm really no good, really not able to resist .. and from there, that God isn't really on my side.

I need to remember, says John Piper, that the very fact of my struggling, the very fact of movement in me is a sign of the life of God within. Indeed, the more desparate the struggle, the more certainty there is of the life of God pulsating through my veins.

How you read John will depend very much on your theology. A bit like the Bible really

Somebody started a thread on this question, but I'll put it to you here: why bother to avoid sin? If you are saved, what's the point? Avoiding sin is a lot of hard work, don't you think? If this work is not necessary to be saved, why bother?

(Of course I don't propose that people should not avoid sin, but I'd be interested to hear your answer. Avoidance of sin is work, but is it necessary for salvation or is it just a glossy add-on for the very dedicated soul?)

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

Somebody started a thread on this question, but I'll put it to you here: why bother to avoid sin? If you are saved, what's the point? Avoiding sin is a lot of hard work, don't you think? If this work is not necessary to be saved, why bother?

(Of course I don't propose that people should not avoid sin, but I'd be interested to hear your answer. Avoidance of sin is work, but is it necessary for salvation or is it just a glossy add-on for the very dedicated soul?)

Love? At the same time as being saved, I am exposed to the most lovable being in existance

Life is better? Sin might well satisfy the flesh in the instant but it brings trouble and strife in the not very long run.

Avoiding God's discipline. It might be necessary for him to do it but why put yourself through the pain of it if you don't have to?

Congruency? Paul, after painstakingly presenting the mechanics of the the gospel of grace only (Romans 3:21 - 5:20) pauses to insert a parentheses in his argument before continuing at the start of Romans 8. In that parentheses he deals with two objections to that gospel. And the very first objection he answers is the very one you yourself make. First, because it's the automatic objection anyone who ever hears the gospel of grace will make.

His response is that sin is incongruent for the children of God. For that is what a God-defined Christian is (according to the 'Protestants'). I am a child of the living God. A God to whom I have access and whose holiness is sheer attraction to me. How could I cheerfully sin as if it didn't matter knowing what an offence it is to him. Knowing what it was he had to put himself through in order for it to be dealt with?

I'd be like an Allied soldier fighting on the side of the Nazi's for heavens sake!

Utter incongruency...says Paul

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'd be like an Allied soldier fighting on the side of the Nazi's for heavens sake!

Utter incongruency...says Paul

Incongruency or not, is this work necessary for salvation, or can Allied soldiers who fight for the Nazis be saved?

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

Incongruency or not, is this work necessary for salvation, or can Allied soldiers who fight for the Nazis be saved?

This work isn't necessary for salvation. It is necessary for love, a nice life, eternal reward, avoiding discipline and conguency. Amongst other positive things.

There's more to eternal life than salvation, Donnatello.

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

This work isn't necessary for salvation. It is necessary for love, a nice life, eternal reward, avoiding discipline and conguency. Amongst other positive things.

There's more to eternal life than salvation, Donnatello.

So, you can be a Christian but you don't have to do the hard work of avoiding sin to be saved. But it is necessary for eternal reward and love...

Either this hard work of avoiding sin is necessary for salvation or it isn't. Which is it?

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

So, you can be a Christian but you don't have to do the hard work of avoiding sin to be saved.

Correct

But it is necessary for eternal reward and love...

Correct

Either this hard work of avoiding sin is necessary for eternal reward or it isn't. Which is it?

It is necessary for eternal reward. The idea being that there will be greater and lesser in heaven. Your work determines your heavenly reward or position (so to speak) - but not your getting there in the first place.

Donatello

antiskeptic wrote: »

Correct

Correct

It is necessary for eternal reward. The idea being that there will be greater and lesser in heaven. Your work determines your heavenly reward or position (so to speak) - but not your getting there in the first place.

What do you say about this verse:

Galatians 5:19-21- “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”

What if you commit fornication? Does that affect your salvation?

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

What do you say about this verse:

Precisely the same thing as I said to you earlier:

I don't derive my doctrine from chopped up snippets of context-less scripture thrun together to form oft-times literalistic and inevitably simplistic word salad

Donatello

I'll try a different angle then on the same question. I hope you don't mind if I include you in the following example, but since it is your theology I'm curious about, what better person!

What would happen if you were engaging in a sin, let us say fornication, and you died whilst you were in the process of committing the sin. What happens Antiskeptic? Heaven, or hell, and why? Does the sin of fornication affect your salvation? Forget about specific Bible verses, even the one below.

“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”
-- Galatians 5:19-21

lmaopml

The osas doctrine is held by some christians, others believe that they are pre-destined from birth to either being saved or no, and yet others believe that we are most assuredly saved and leave room for free will and rejection of Christ that free will demands in this lifetime, and others believe we have free will and are in the process of being saved - that it isn't over till the fat lady sings as such.

Tbh, I don't see a 'massive' difference, except for pedantics when discussing this topic in isolation as opposed to receiving a strenghening of grace in the sacraments and prayer.

Most everybody agrees that one can turn their back on Christ at anytime, except perhaps if you are completely predestined from birth onwards. Even osas would allow room for this? Although, then perhaps they would say they weren't filled with the Holy Spirit in the first place and were never actually saved in the first place - which makes it difficult to pin down really..lol...

I think most Christians believe in a form of predestination, but there are many and varied views on God's foreknowledge and whether it means we are predestined and how that effects our freewill....St. Thomas Aquinas dealt with this in some detail and rigour..

The philosophical debate requires some mental aerobics, but it's interesting to see various perspectives. It's age old this one..:)

antiskeptic

Donatello wrote: »

I'll try a different angle then on the same question. I hope you don't mind if I include you in the following example, but since it is your theology I'm curious about, what better person!

No worries but I suspect I'll just be repeating myself.

What would happen if you were engaging in a sin, let us say fornication, and you died whilst you were in the process of committing the sin. What happens Antiskeptic? Heaven, or hell, and why?

Heaven. Because my sin is laid on Jesus Christ.

Does the sin of fornication affect your salvation? Forget about specific Bible verses, even the one below.

Okay, I'll forget about specific, standalone, out-of-context, (supposedly) proof-verses.

The sin of fornication doesn't affect my salvation for the reason given above.