Announcement

Collapse

Ecclesiology 201 Guidelines

Discussion on matters of general mainstream Christian churches. What are the differences between Catholics and protestants? How has the charismatic movement affected the church? Are Southern baptists different from fundamentalist baptists? It is also for discussions about the nature of the church.

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and theists. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions. Additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

An interview with a former Roman Catholic

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    On technical grounds, perhaps it is not so, but the imputed meanings applied to the distinction do make a difference. Paul does not say that good works are unnecessary, in fact he says - explicitly - that those who do not eschew sin and produce good works inherit nothing of heaven.
    1 Cor 6:7-10 for example - the actions listed WERE committed by (at least) some of the believers, and a believer who continues those actions will not be spared. Paul repeats the same claim in Galatians 5: 19-21 and again in Ephesians 5:3-6.
    So yes: Paul and James are in agreement - a man is justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:24).
    I have trouble seeing how that is consistent with Gal. 3. There, the emphasis is how we progress in our salvation, as opposed to how we got in to start with. In both cases, the answer is "by faith, not by works."

    I'm aware this is inconsistent with the "vice lists" in 1 Cor. 6 and Eph. 5. My best attempt to harmonize is to suggest that continuing in those practices will eventually harden our hearts and lead us to willfully and irredeemably abandon the Lord. I admit that is a rather strained interpretation of the vice lists.
    Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

    Beige Federalist.

    Nationalist Christian.

    "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

    Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

    Proud member of the this space left blank community.

    Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

    Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

    Justice for Matthew Perna!

    Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

      I agree, but see it differently - BECAUSE we have faith, we demonstrate it by works. BECAUSE we have received Grace, we WANT to extend grace to others.
      I don't see "want to" as the start point - rather that point is where the person begins to set about doing, and the doing starts with setting about cleaning up one's own act.

      So the life one lives can either demonstrate that the faith was genuine, or not.
      But of course, pointing out the fact makes one judgemental, pharisaic even.

      But to extend that to MY works "adding to" the "merit" of somebody trapped in Purgatory just blows my mind.
      As to that, the information linked by NorrinRadd is illuminating. The logic is impeccable, but it is based on some false premises, which is to say GIGO.

      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
      .
      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
      Scripture before Tradition:
      but that won't prevent others from
      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
      of the right to call yourself Christian.

      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        To me, it's like Catholicism created (or accepted as doctrine) this "purgatory" concept in the 12th century, ...
        Did you notice the "Catholic Answers" articles that note that some concept of an "intermediate state," whether or not it be labeled "Purgatory," existed even before the time of Christ?
        Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

        Beige Federalist.

        Nationalist Christian.

        "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

        Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

        Proud member of the this space left blank community.

        Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

        Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

        Justice for Matthew Perna!

        Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

          I have trouble seeing how that is consistent with Gal. 3. There, the emphasis is how we progress in our salvation, as opposed to how we got in to start with. In both cases, the answer is "by faith, not by works."

          I'm aware this is inconsistent with the "vice lists" in 1 Cor. 6 and Eph. 5. My best attempt to harmonize is to suggest that continuing in those practices will eventually harden our hearts and lead us to willfully and irredeemably abandon the Lord. I admit that is a rather strained interpretation of the vice lists.
          I think that has always been problematic for OSAS believers - and it is generally held by us that those who abandoned the faith by returning to lives of sin never were genuinely saved in the first place.

          Scripture Verse: 1 John 2:

          [19] They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. [20] But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

          © Copyright Original Source

          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
            Did you notice the "Catholic Answers" articles that note that some concept of an "intermediate state," whether or not it be labeled "Purgatory," existed even before the time of Christ?
            Yes, I saw that - been doing a lot of "Catholic Answers" reading.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post

              I have trouble seeing how that is consistent with Gal. 3. There, the emphasis is how we progress in our salvation, as opposed to how we got in to start with. In both cases, the answer is "by faith, not by works."

              I'm aware this is inconsistent with the "vice lists" in 1 Cor. 6 and Eph. 5. My best attempt to harmonize is to suggest that continuing in those practices will eventually harden our hearts and lead us to willfully and irredeemably abandon the Lord. I admit that is a rather strained interpretation of the vice lists.
              Verse 1 - Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified (in writing)

              Verse 5 - Which works, specifically, does Paul refer to? All works, or a specific subset of works?

              Verse 10 - Which works, specifically, is Paul referring to?

              Verse 11 - is the verse that Paul cites (Habakkuk 2:4) referring to belief (aman) or fidelity (emunah)?
              Habbakuk 2:4 (God says) The righteous shall live by XX emunah. [Hebrew text, XX = "his;" LXX text, XX = "my."
              I'm inclined to think that "my" is the more likely to be accurate.

              Verse 12 - Which law does Paul specifically have in mind here?

              So - no contradiction with Galatians 5 at all.

              That should do for a start.
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                Yes, I saw that - been doing a lot of "Catholic Answers" reading.
                Quite honestly, in "Catholic Answers", I see some of the same "logic" that I saw when looking at Mormon websites for their explanations of rather odd beliefs.


                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                  Yes, I saw that - been doing a lot of "Catholic Answers" reading.
                  So far I've only skimmed. I did notice one of the articles claimed, or seemed to, that the Macc. books were removed by Protestants *because* they so clearly support the doctrine of Purgatory. I'm skeptical of that claim.
                  Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                  Beige Federalist.

                  Nationalist Christian.

                  "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                  Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                  Proud member of the this space left blank community.

                  Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

                  Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

                  Justice for Matthew Perna!

                  Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    To me, it's like Catholicism created (or accepted as doctrine) this "purgatory" concept in the 12th century, abused its use for a time, and now are in the spot of having to rationalize and justify the teaching of it by twisting terms and coming up with "explanations" that require redefinition of words, like two meanings of "Grace".

                    Is not "unmerited favor" an acceptable definition of Grace?

                    And it's not just about "works" - it extends "works" to be required by some on behalf of others. Living people have to "do works" on behalf of persons who are dead and no longer can "add to" their own merit.

                    Where do we find, in God's word, anybody who is dependent upon other human beings for their arrival in Heaven?

                    (I just finished reading the "Catholic Answers" to the fact that there is one mediator between man and God, and that is Christ Jesus.)
                    Let me address Purgatory first. The Catholic Church has only three "official" doctrines on Purgatory.


                    All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven. (CCC 1030)
                    The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned... (CCC 1031)

                    This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin." From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them.... (CCC 1032)

                    It's true that at Florence and Trent the name "Purgatory" was given to the final state of purification and the doctrine was formalized. But it's not the case that it just "popped up out of thin air" like "mormon revelations"
                    First established of course that prayers were offered for the dead in Judaism as was stated in 2 Maccabees. This practice continued in early Christianity. We know that at least in one of Paul's letters he used the practice of baptism on behalf of the dead to remind the Corinthians of the final resurrection. (Side note We don't baptise on behalf of dead relatives. they were either baptised in this life or not) But archeological evidence shows that prayers were written on the walls of the Catacombs by early 1st century Christians on behalf of the dead:
                    Pax tibi | Peace to you.
                    Aeterna lux tibi | Eternal light for you.
                    Pax tibi cum angelis | Peace for you with the angels.
                    Pax tibi cum sanctis | Peace for you with the saints.
                    Deus tibi refrigeret | May God refresh you. (Catholic Encyclopedia)

                    And then also inscribed
                    Ut quisquis de fratribus legerity, roget Deum ut sancto et innocent spiritu ad Deum suscipiatur. If any of the brethren reads this, let him ask that this holy and innocent soul may be received by God (Catholic Encyclopedia)

                    These prayers are believed to have been found during Emporer Domitian's reign; and that would also cover the time when "Revelation" was written.
                    In later years we see Early Church Fathers talk about it. Two good Examples were Tertullian and St. Augustine.
                    "But the profane and those who have not turned wholly to God will be in the punishment of perpetual fire, and they shall have from this fire a divine supply of incorruptibility. Even the philosophers knew of the difference between this mysterious fire and ordinary fire....It does not consume what it burns but while it destroys it restores." Tertullian Apology 48

                    "And because it is said 'he shall be saved, yet so as by fire,' that fire is lightly thought of. For all that, though we should be 'saved by fire,' yet will that fire be more grevious than anything man can suffer in his life whatsoever." (St. Augustine, Exposition on the Psalms)
                    "Temporary punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by others after death, by others both now and then; but all of them before the last and strictest judgement." (St. Augustine, the City of God)

                    "Each one will be presented to the Judge exactly as he was when he departed this life. Yet there must be a cleansing fire before judgement, because some minor faults that may remain to be purged away. (St Gregory the Great Dialogues 4:39)

                    "Indeed the woman prays for her husband's soul and requests refreshment for him mean while and fellowship with him in the first ressurrection and she offers her sacrifice on the anniversary of his falling asleep. (Tertullian on Monogamy)

                    So we aren't talking out of left field. It's a state that was held by Early Fathers and Doctors of the Church to exist. It was at Florence and Trent when the name was hammered out and the doctrine formally written down.
                    A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
                    George Bernard Shaw

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                      Mr. mossy was only 25 and allowed his grandparents to plan the funeral, but he wasn't happy about it. The plea for indulgence money was particularly distasteful to him, but his grandparents didn't allow him a say in anything.
                      Ok.
                      And it's only your opinion that praying for the dead is a comfort to anyone.
                      No, it's YOUR opinion that it is NOT a comfort to anyone, simply because it goes against your beliefs.

                      It is, factually, a comfort to ME. I have also seen it be a comfort to many people at services for the dead.
                      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                      sigpic
                      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

                        I think that has always been problematic for OSAS believers - and it is generally held by us that those who abandoned the faith by returning to lives of sin never were genuinely saved in the first place.

                        Scripture Verse: 1 John 2:

                        [19] They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. [20] But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

                        © Copyright Original Source

                        Growing up Baptist I was taught OSAS. and then I recognized how people I was close to used it to pretty much justify behaving however they wanted to. Most recently the child of a former youth pastor ended up attempting to kill his girlfriend and then committed suicide. The family mentioned that he was now "with his savior" and honestly if he believed in God he certainly was more attached to his anger than God. The whole family was a mess. The father cheated on his wife, the men in the family constantly belittling women as useless and of course they believed in recreational use of guns (as in shooting animals just for fun)
                        I question their sincerity in belief, but personally believing in purgatory kind of gives me hope for the young man. He would have temporal punishment to atone for his sin in this life and rid himself of that attachment to anger before going to heaven and standing before God for the final judgement. OSAS would lead me to believe the stronger possibility of him in hell.
                        The other thing about it that pulled me away from OSAS well before I converted into the Catholic Church was St. Paul's admonition "Yet I work out my salvation with fear and trembling lest I myself be disqualified"

                        The indicators of Scripture to me point to the fact that even if you don't "feel like" behaving, it's the obligation of Christian to ask for the grace to overcome the sinful nature so that we can behave. I often wonder if at times Catholics and Protestants are talking a bit past one another. Earlier you said this:
                        Is not "unmerited favor" an acceptable definition of Grace?
                        agree, but see it differently - BECAUSE we have faith, we demonstrate it by works. BECAUSE we have received Grace, we WANT to extend grace to others
                        Both statements are equally true. What did we do to merit the atonement of Christ? Abslutely nothing and not a thing. We deserve the opposite.
                        The second statement also is taught. But the reciprocal is taught too, it's an obligation to ask for the Grace to behave when you don't feel like it. Ultimately though, in the Catholic Church, it all comes back to Grace from God as the origin for everything, even the things that we consider "required"


                        A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
                        George Bernard Shaw

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                          Ok.

                          No, it's YOUR opinion that it is NOT a comfort to anyone, simply because it goes against your beliefs.

                          It is, factually, a comfort to ME. I have also seen it be a comfort to many people at services for the dead.
                          It's a comfort to me too. As well as my homeschool group and my entire Church and the coop etc....
                          A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
                          George Bernard Shaw

                          Comment


                          • OK, I give up. I see no clear answer on "doing works" for the dead, albeit framed in "adding merit".

                            Quite honestly, I think that somehow the Catholics came up with this as part of their integral doctrines, but can't quite deal with the fact that they are teaching people to "do works" on behalf of the dead who are not able to "add sufficient merit" on their own. Nowhere in the Bible do I find one person's Salvation dependent upon the "added merit" of a second party, not Christ.

                            I appreciate your time and attempt to answer.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              OK, I give up. I see no clear answer on "doing works" for the dead, albeit framed in "adding merit".

                              Quite honestly, I think that somehow the Catholics came up with this as part of their integral doctrines, but can't quite deal with the fact that they are teaching people to "do works" on behalf of the dead who are not able to "add sufficient merit" on their own. Nowhere in the Bible do I find one person's Salvation dependent upon the "added merit" of a second party, not Christ.

                              I appreciate your time and attempt to answer.
                              I appreciate the dialogue. I know we have differences in our beliefs. We absolutely agree 100 percent on a great deal though (Jesus was God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Crucifixion, Ressurrection, Jesus is the Way to eternal life etc....
                              Since were past the purgatory thing does this mean I can go on to address the videos charges about the actual Mass, The Eucharist and Gendron's charge of "Doctrines of Demons?"
                              A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
                              George Bernard Shaw

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Catholicity View Post
                                I appreciate the dialogue. I know we have differences in our beliefs. We absolutely agree 100 percent on a great deal though (Jesus was God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Crucifixion, Ressurrection, Jesus is the Way to eternal life etc....
                                Since were past the purgatory thing does this mean I can go on to address the videos charges about the actual Mass, The Eucharist and Gendron's charge of "Doctrines of Demons?"
                                You are free to discuss anything you wish.

                                My biggest problem - and I've been consistent with this - is that Purgatory is proof that, although Catholics denounce it vociferously, Catholicism is, indeed, a works-based religion.

                                Nobody seems to be able to explain how the living "doing works" for the dead trapped in Purgatory has any basis in the Scripture at all.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X