- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: A biblical warning about our times
Posted on 2/7/22 at 10:56 am to Revelator
Posted on 2/7/22 at 10:56 am to Revelator
quote:
2 Timothy 1-5
You should know this, that in the last days there will be very difficult times.
2 For people will love only themselves and their money. They will be boastful and proud, scoffing at God, disobedient to their parents, and ungrateful. They will consider nothing sacred.
3 They will be unloving and unforgiving; they will slander others and have no self-control. They will be cruel and hate what is good.
4 They will betray their friends, be reckless, be puffed up with pride, and love pleasure rather than God.
5 They will act religious, but they will reject the power that could make them godly. Stay away from people like that
This describes people alive at any time, ever
This post was edited on 2/7/22 at 10:57 am
1
Posted on 2/7/22 at 10:59 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
quote:
so essentially, stay away from earth and humans since for forever.
Yeah, it was never like that in the past.
Yeah Hitler and Stalin were great guys who were really nice to everyone
Posted on 2/7/22 at 11:01 am to xxTIMMYxx
quote:
I’ll never understand why Jesus would pop up because the US is going through tough times, for once. Most of the world has been suffering for thousands of years, but he’s just going to come back because Americans are disgruntled? That makes no fricking sense
Being ignorant as frick helps some people sleep better at night
Posted on 2/7/22 at 11:38 am to catholictigerfan
I'm joining in this conversation late, but I'd figure I'd provide my perspective as a Reformed (Calvinist) Christian:
No person is ever justified by the works of the law (Rom. 3:20; Gal. 2:16)
When Paul said that the church should work out its salvation with fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), he wasn't talking about working towards their salvation. The very next verse clarifies: "for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." In other words, it is God who does the work of salvation in a person, both justifying a person (making them righteous before God by faith in Christ's work) and sanctifying them (conforming them to the image of Christ by removing or mortifying sin us). The previous 11 verses speak of the humility believers should have that reflects the humility of Christ, and therefore, we should look to our own salvation in humility, not in boasting, but in fear and trembling, making sure that salvation is evident by our actions, rather than resting in a proclamation alone and neglecting the necessity of conformity to the image of Christ in our actions that evidence truth, saving faith.
Here is where the system of salvation comes into play:
1. Man has a sinful nature that prevents him from trusting in Christ
2. God has chosen a people for Christ to be His bride from before the creation of the world
3. This bride that has been given to Christ was whom Christ was sent to save and His death on the cross was to save them
4. Those who belong to Christ will be given the Holy Spirit to change their hearts of stone to hearts of flesh, regenerating them, making them alive, and God gives them faith to receive the promise of eternal life
5. Because God is the one who changes one of the elect, and because God is the one who gives them faith, and because God is the one who justifies them; God is there one who will uphold them, preventing them from falling away, but preserving them until they are glorified in Heaven.
quote:Justification/salvation is by grace, through faith alone, not of works (Eph. 2:8-9).
What I said was initial justification is by the gift and grace of God alone. However, as St. Paul himself says we should work on our salvation with fear and trembling.
No person is ever justified by the works of the law (Rom. 3:20; Gal. 2:16)
When Paul said that the church should work out its salvation with fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12), he wasn't talking about working towards their salvation. The very next verse clarifies: "for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." In other words, it is God who does the work of salvation in a person, both justifying a person (making them righteous before God by faith in Christ's work) and sanctifying them (conforming them to the image of Christ by removing or mortifying sin us). The previous 11 verses speak of the humility believers should have that reflects the humility of Christ, and therefore, we should look to our own salvation in humility, not in boasting, but in fear and trembling, making sure that salvation is evident by our actions, rather than resting in a proclamation alone and neglecting the necessity of conformity to the image of Christ in our actions that evidence truth, saving faith.
quote:We know from other passages that the elect of God cannot lose their salvation (Phil. 1:6; John 10:25-30; 1 John 2:19; 3:9), so Jesus must mean something else by this. The conclusion is actually the opposite of what you say it is, namely that apart from Christ, we are powerless to be fruitful, yet there are many who call on the name of the Lord that are not part of His flock (Matt. 7:21-23; John 10:25-30; 1 John 2:19), or in this case, His branches, and they are cast off because their lack of fruit bears them out. They are the vines that are cast off into the fire. They are those who claim association with the vine yet are not one of His branches.
No-one can earn his own salvation it only comes through the grace of Jesus Christ however, we can lose the salvation God gave us by our sinfulness. I point you to John 15:1-17. It's not a direct explanation of how we lose our salvation but an indirect one.
Here is where the system of salvation comes into play:
1. Man has a sinful nature that prevents him from trusting in Christ
2. God has chosen a people for Christ to be His bride from before the creation of the world
3. This bride that has been given to Christ was whom Christ was sent to save and His death on the cross was to save them
4. Those who belong to Christ will be given the Holy Spirit to change their hearts of stone to hearts of flesh, regenerating them, making them alive, and God gives them faith to receive the promise of eternal life
5. Because God is the one who changes one of the elect, and because God is the one who gives them faith, and because God is the one who justifies them; God is there one who will uphold them, preventing them from falling away, but preserving them until they are glorified in Heaven.
Posted on 2/7/22 at 2:36 pm to Enadious
quote:
Different coaches apply different strategies from play books to win games.
Different faiths apply scriptures to win the acceptance of God.
Horse shite.
quote:
Don't be so smug. It's not fooling the Almighty.
Why would I try to fool the "Almighty"Posted on 2/7/22 at 2:42 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Justification/salvation is by grace, through faith alone, not of works
No person is ever justified by the works of the law
How many times do I have to explain that Catholics do not believe in salvation by works alone. As I mentioned multiple times but some of you choose to ignore is that the initial moment of salvation AKA baptism, is a working of God alone and grace alone. No work we can do can ever justify us before God. I've quoted this before but see below that the Church (Council of Trent 16th century) condemns salvation by works apart from grace as heresy.
quote:
CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.
But again there are plenty of scriptures that point to us being judged by our works. Think of Matthew 25:31-46 clearly paints a picture of being judged by our works.
Secondly, there are those who say Lord, Lord but are not saved, because he didn't know them. Matthew 7:21-23. They obviously have faith in God but are not saved.
quote:
We know from other passages that the elect of God cannot lose their salvation (Phil. 1:6; John 10:25-30; 1 John 2:19; 3:9), so Jesus must mean something else by this.
I need to review these passages. But I can argue that St. Paul must mean something different than what you suggest because of what Jesus says in John 15.
quote:
The conclusion is actually the opposite of what you say it is, namely that apart from Christ, we are powerless to be fruitful
We agree here, and I don't see where you got that from what I said. I think you are reading into what I say based on what you believe Catholics believe instead of actually reading what I'm saying.
quote:
His branches, and they are cast off because their lack of fruit bears them out. They are the vines that are cast off into the fire. They are those who claim association with the vine yet are not one of His branches.
This is where we disagree. How can a branch merely be associated with a vine? You can't tape a branch onto a vine and expect it to bear fruit. Yet there are some branches that are grafted onto the vine that do not bear fruit, those are cut away. If you are grafted onto the vine it means that you are a part of his body the Church. Those in the body of Christ can be cut off through their own fault or sin.
It should also be noted that the vine represents the Body of Christ or the Church. If the Church is the new Israel, then it makes sense that this comparison works. Isaiah 5:7 points to this reality. So does Psalm 80:9
So it appears to me that the vine is the Church (the body of Christ). Yes, Jesus is the Church, the mystical body of Christ. (Romans 12:5, 1 Corinthians 12:12-27) the branches are its members, and its members (the baptized) can be cut off if they do not bear fruit. Yes, Jesus is the Vine but so is the Church. St. Paul clearly states the members of the Church make up the Body of Christ.
quote:
1. Man has a sinful nature that prevents him from trusting in Christ
2. God has chosen a people for Christ to be His bride from before the creation of the world
3. This bride that has been given to Christ was whom Christ was sent to save and His death on the cross was to save them
4. Those who belong to Christ will be given the Holy Spirit to change their hearts of stone to hearts of flesh, regenerating them, making them alive, and God gives them faith to receive the promise of eternal life
5. Because God is the one who changes one of the elect, and because God is the one who gives them faith, and because God is the one who justifies them; God is there one who will uphold them, preventing them from falling away, but preserving them until they are glorified in Heaven.
I don't see how #5 follows in light of free will. Are you saying once we are saved we lose our free will? How did Adam and Eve sin? Why did Judas sin? I could list other examples too.
Yes God sustains us but that doesn't mean we can cut ourselves off from the vine.
Finally, sorry if I leave out some parts of your response. I can’t reply to everything you say it would make these posts too long.
Posted on 2/7/22 at 2:44 pm to hubertcumberdale
That's been going on since Paul wrote that so we've been on a slow roll to end times since what; 60-70 AD?
Posted on 2/7/22 at 4:54 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:See, the reason why Protestants say that Catholics believe in a works-based justification is because Catholics disagree with the concept of justification by faith alone. As soon as you add the works of man into the requirements for justification, you now have a works-based salvation. Sure, it's not works alone, but it requires works all the same, as if there is anything sinful man can do to add to what Christ has already done. All the quote from Trent establishes is that works alone does not save anyone. Catholicism teaches a synergistic or cooperative view of salvation, whereby man and God contribute to man's salvation: God in the grace, and man in the faith and obedience. Protestants believe that salvation is monergistic, whereby God saves His people without our contributing anything to our salvation other than the sin that provides the need for it.
How many times do I have to explain that Catholics do not believe in salvation by works alone. As I mentioned multiple times but some of you choose to ignore is that the initial moment of salvation AKA baptism, is a working of God alone and grace alone. No work we can do can ever justify us before God. I've quoted this before but see below that the Church (Council of Trent 16th century) condemns salvation by works apart from grace as heresy.
quote:Yes, and as it is sometimes said, "faith gets you the house while works get you the furniture". Faith alone saves a person, but the "treasures" that will be stored up in Heaven (or the punishment lavished on the wicked) will be measured by our works on earth. Works do not contribute towards our salvation, though.
But again there are plenty of scriptures that point to us being judged by our works. Think of Matthew 25:31-46 clearly paints a picture of being judged by our works.
quote:No, they don't "obviously" have faith in God, at least not a saving faith. There are many who say that Jesus is Lord without a saving trust in His work on the cross for them. Satan knows who Jesus is. His intellectual assent alone does not save him. Likewise, there are many people who assent to Jesus being Lord without trusting that His work saves them, specifically. These people are who Jesus was referring to.
Secondly, there are those who say Lord, Lord but are not saved, because he didn't know them. Matthew 7:21-23. They obviously have faith in God but are not saved.
In addition, Jesus said "I never knew you". This isn't an intellectual knowledge or awareness. Jesus didn't said "I never knew of you". It's the biblical concept of intimate relationship, as when Adam "knew" Eve and they had a child. Jesus "knows" His sheep (John 10), and His sheep "know" Him. Those who belong to Christ will be kept until the end, while those who profess belief but do not actually have it will fall away. They are like the thousands of disciples that followed Him for the miracles but then left Him when He gave them hard sayings, or they are like those who left the faith/church to prove that they were never truly part of God's elect (1 John 2:19)
quote:Jesus wasn't talking about grafted branches in this instance, but branches that appeared to be part of the vine. Israel was a branch that that was cut off because it didn't bear fruit (belief). Likewise, those branches that profess faith in Christ yet do not have a saving faith that produces fruit will be cut off.
This is where we disagree. How can a branch merely be associated with a vine? You can't tape a branch onto a vine and expect it to bear fruit. Yet there are some branches that are grafted onto the vine that do not bear fruit, those are cut away. If you are grafted onto the vine it means that you are a part of his body the Church. Those in the body of Christ can be cut off through their own fault or sin.
quote:Jesus, Himself, said that He is the vine, not that the Church is the vine. The Church is the assortment of branches that are fed by the vine (Christ).
It should also be noted that the vine represents the Body of Christ or the Church. If the Church is the new Israel, then it makes sense that this comparison works. Isaiah 5:7 points to this reality. So does Psalm 80:9
quote:This wasn't the intent of the parable. Jesus specifically said that He is the vine, and the branches are the visible church (those who profess faith) and the invisible church (those who actually have saving, trusting faith). Those who do not bear fruit show themselves to be worthless branches and are cut off while those that bear fruit prove that they are living branches and are pruned to bear even more fruit. While it's true that the Church is the body of Christ, that's not what Jesus was getting at here.
So it appears to me that the vine is the Church (the body of Christ). Yes, Jesus is the Church, the mystical body of Christ. (Romans 12:5, 1 Corinthians 12:12-27) the branches are its members, and its members (the baptized) can be cut off if they do not bear fruit. Yes, Jesus is the Vine but so is the Church. St. Paul clearly states the members of the Church make up the Body of Christ.
quote:The will is not free, and by "free", I mean free from influence, or is in some way neutral towards spiritual things. Due to Adam's sin, we have a sinful nature that has corrupted our wills and causes us to always choose that which is spiritually bad because that is what we naturally desire. It's why we have to have a new nature. Once we are given a new nature, we have the Holy Spirit that both enables us and convicts us to trust in Christ and do that which is spiritually good. However, our wills--just like the rest of us--are still corrupted by sin, and we won't be free of it until we are glorified in Heaven.
I don't see how #5 follows in light of free will. Are you saying once we are saved we lose our free will? How did Adam and Eve sin? Why did Judas sin? I could list other examples too.
Adam and Eve had no corrupted nature or will; they could both sin and not sin, yet chose to sin because of temptation. We, on the other hand, are not neutral, which is the crux of the doctrine of original sin.
Judas was not one of God's elect (unto salvation). He was a reprobate that followed Jesus to fulfill prophecy.
quote:Going back to John 10: no one can take Christ's sheep away from Him, because they are His sheep, given to Him by the Father. We cannot cut ourselves off if we are part of the vine by faith, and we cannot leave our shepherd once He has given us ears to hear Him and eyes to see Him. It's not because we're being forced to stay, but because our new wills and natures desire Christ.
Yes God sustains us but that doesn't mean we can cut ourselves off from the vine.
Posted on 2/7/22 at 5:00 pm to FooManChoo
Great post Foo!
Posted on 2/7/22 at 5:57 pm to Revelator
If that didn’t hit the nail on the, then what would.
This post was edited on 2/10/22 at 6:59 am
Posted on 2/7/22 at 8:26 pm to FooManChoo
ok this is a lot to respond to.
See I've never heard of the words synergism and monergenism. But correct me if I'm wrong. You definition is that Catholic co-operate with God's grace, while God does everything for you.
St Thomas Aquinas explains cooperating vs operating grace. IT seems to be in line with what you are discussing. article two in this LINK
But it makes sense to me that we would cooperate with God's grace, not that we are somehow lessening God but given that we have free will, he would give us the choice to chose him or not.
Matthew 25:31-46 suggests otherwise. What matters on the day of judgement according to Jesus? If we did good works for our neighbor. Does that mean we can save ourselves if we simply do good, NO. I've explained this before. But your whole furniture in the house analogy doesn't take into account the passage that clearly states those who did not care for their neighbor where condemned by God.
This is where I go back to the vine and the branches I think it is key in understanding one saved always saved and how that doctrine is not biblical. As I see you address this later.
Yes we agree on this. Next.
think about a tree or a vine. Are there branches that are clearly a part of the vine/tree but produce no fruit? Yes that is clear to me. Those branches don't appear to be on the vine, they are in fact a part of the vine but bear no fruit. What does the vinedresser do with those branches he cuts them off and throws them into the fire another way to depict hell.
Yes and no. Yes Jesus says he is the vine I do not deny that. HOWEVER, St. Paul explains that the Church is the Body of Christ. In a mysterious way Jesus is the Church and all the members of the Church make up his body.
By baptism we are joined to the Body of Christ, as in the Church. We can be cut off if we produce no fruit as explained by John 15.
I point you again to Psalm 80:9 here Israel is depicted as a vine that was brought out of Egypt and planted. Jesus using the image of the vine here is not accidental. If the vine in the Old Testament represented Israel than it must represent it in the New Testament. Jesus is understood as the new Israel. In the same way the Church is the new Israel and from this we understand that the vine can be in fact the Church but in a mysterious way because the primary identification is Jesus is the vine.
I've addressed this above.
Hmmmmm
Ok let me make sure I know what you are suggesting. Are you saying that without grace we cannot move to do good, and have no free will. And when we are saved we are moved by the spirit to act good and not evil. Therefore again no free will.
If this is what you hold than we have a philosophical difference not a scriptural difference. Your philosophy shapes the way you read the scripture, I would need to prove free will to you to change your view of scripture.
So can we. But you seem to disagree with this view.
I need to read up on John 10 again, but this seems to come down to the idea of freedom again. If we have the freedom to choose to sin or not than we can be cut off. If not because the spirit always moves us to not sin than your right we can never be cut off.
quote:
See, the reason why Protestants say that Catholics believe in a works-based justification is because Catholics disagree with the concept of justification by faith alone. As soon as you add the works of man into the requirements for justification, you now have a works-based salvation. Sure, it's not works alone, but it requires works all the same, as if there is anything sinful man can do to add to what Christ has already done. All the quote from Trent establishes is that works alone does not save anyone. Catholicism teaches a synergistic or cooperative view of salvation, whereby man and God contribute to man's salvation: God in the grace, and man in the faith and obedience. Protestants believe that salvation is monergistic, whereby God saves His people without our contributing anything to our salvation other than the sin that provides the need for it.
See I've never heard of the words synergism and monergenism. But correct me if I'm wrong. You definition is that Catholic co-operate with God's grace, while God does everything for you.
St Thomas Aquinas explains cooperating vs operating grace. IT seems to be in line with what you are discussing. article two in this LINK
But it makes sense to me that we would cooperate with God's grace, not that we are somehow lessening God but given that we have free will, he would give us the choice to chose him or not.
quote:
Yes, and as it is sometimes said, "faith gets you the house while works get you the furniture". Faith alone saves a person, but the "treasures" that will be stored up in Heaven (or the punishment lavished on the wicked) will be measured by our works on earth. Works do not contribute towards our salvation, though.
Matthew 25:31-46 suggests otherwise. What matters on the day of judgement according to Jesus? If we did good works for our neighbor. Does that mean we can save ourselves if we simply do good, NO. I've explained this before. But your whole furniture in the house analogy doesn't take into account the passage that clearly states those who did not care for their neighbor where condemned by God.
quote:
No, they don't "obviously" have faith in God, at least not a saving faith. There are many who say that Jesus is Lord without a saving trust in His work on the cross for them. Satan knows who Jesus is. His intellectual assent alone does not save him. Likewise, there are many people who assent to Jesus being Lord without trusting that His work saves them, specifically. These people are who Jesus was referring to.
This is where I go back to the vine and the branches I think it is key in understanding one saved always saved and how that doctrine is not biblical. As I see you address this later.
quote:
In addition, Jesus said "I never knew you". This isn't an intellectual knowledge or awareness. Jesus didn't said "I never knew of you". It's the biblical concept of intimate relationship, as when Adam "knew" Eve and they had a child. Jesus "knows" His sheep (John 10), and His sheep "know" Him. Those who belong to Christ will be kept until the end, while those who profess belief but do not actually have it will fall away. They are like the thousands of disciples that followed Him for the miracles but then left Him when He gave them hard sayings, or they are like those who left the faith/church to prove that they were never truly part of God's elect (1 John 2:19)
Yes we agree on this. Next.
quote:
Jesus wasn't talking about grafted branches in this instance, but branches that appeared to be part of the vine
think about a tree or a vine. Are there branches that are clearly a part of the vine/tree but produce no fruit? Yes that is clear to me. Those branches don't appear to be on the vine, they are in fact a part of the vine but bear no fruit. What does the vinedresser do with those branches he cuts them off and throws them into the fire another way to depict hell.
quote:
Jesus, Himself, said that He is the vine, not that the Church is the vine. The Church is the assortment of branches that are fed by the vine (Christ).
Yes and no. Yes Jesus says he is the vine I do not deny that. HOWEVER, St. Paul explains that the Church is the Body of Christ. In a mysterious way Jesus is the Church and all the members of the Church make up his body.
By baptism we are joined to the Body of Christ, as in the Church. We can be cut off if we produce no fruit as explained by John 15.
I point you again to Psalm 80:9 here Israel is depicted as a vine that was brought out of Egypt and planted. Jesus using the image of the vine here is not accidental. If the vine in the Old Testament represented Israel than it must represent it in the New Testament. Jesus is understood as the new Israel. In the same way the Church is the new Israel and from this we understand that the vine can be in fact the Church but in a mysterious way because the primary identification is Jesus is the vine.
quote:
This wasn't the intent of the parable. Jesus specifically said that He is the vine, and the branches are the visible church (those who profess faith) and the invisible church (those who actually have saving, trusting faith). Those who do not bear fruit show themselves to be worthless branches and are cut off while those that bear fruit prove that they are living branches and are pruned to bear even more fruit. While it's true that the Church is the body of Christ, that's not what Jesus was getting at here.
I've addressed this above.
quote:
The will is not free
Hmmmmm
quote:
and by "free", I mean free from influence, or is in some way neutral towards spiritual things. Due to Adam's sin, we have a sinful nature that has corrupted our wills and causes us to always choose that which is spiritually bad because that is what we naturally desire. It's why we have to have a new nature. Once we are given a new nature, we have the Holy Spirit that both enables us and convicts us to trust in Christ and do that which is spiritually good. However, our wills--just like the rest of us--are still corrupted by sin, and we won't be free of it until we are glorified in Heaven.
Ok let me make sure I know what you are suggesting. Are you saying that without grace we cannot move to do good, and have no free will. And when we are saved we are moved by the spirit to act good and not evil. Therefore again no free will.
If this is what you hold than we have a philosophical difference not a scriptural difference. Your philosophy shapes the way you read the scripture, I would need to prove free will to you to change your view of scripture.
quote:
they could both sin and not sin,
So can we. But you seem to disagree with this view.
quote:
Going back to John 10: no one can take Christ's sheep away from Him, because they are His sheep, given to Him by the Father. We cannot cut ourselves off if we are part of the vine by faith, and we cannot leave our shepherd once He has given us ears to hear Him and eyes to see Him. It's not because we're being forced to stay, but because our new wills and natures desire Christ.
I need to read up on John 10 again, but this seems to come down to the idea of freedom again. If we have the freedom to choose to sin or not than we can be cut off. If not because the spirit always moves us to not sin than your right we can never be cut off.
This post was edited on 2/7/22 at 8:36 pm
Posted on 2/7/22 at 9:05 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:
and the invisible church
The Invisible Church is another Protestant tradition. It is a man-made doctrine invented by men writing 1,500 years after Christ established his Church.
The Church that Christ founded was visible, universal, unified, handed to the Apostles and then handed down from the Apostles to the Church for 1,500 years until some men decided to rip the Body of Christ apart - men who were Protestants.
The men who crucified Christ tore and ripped His fleshly Body. I wonder whether those who profess the false tradition of "Invisible Church" might also be thought of as ripping and tearing at the Body of Christ - His Spiritual Body contained within the Church that He founded.
The Catholic Catechism contains extensive theological and biblical support for its doctrines. Any Protestant who has not read this document and is not prepared to discuss its contents knows nothing about the Catholic Church.
The Protestant sects, of which there are 45,000, all come from traditions and doctrines written by men over 1,500 years after Christ established his Church on earth. None of them contain the depth and solid doctrinal coherence of the Catholic Catechism - THAT'S why our resident Protestants won't show us the document that establishes THEIR church's "catechism" - it either does not exist or it exists in a pamphlet format. Another reason why Prots don't like to identify their Sect is because they all belong to DIFFERENT ones who don't agree on how they interpret the Bible.
Catholics have ONE Catechism, and it is online for anybody to research.
Resident Prots - argue against the Catechism.
Posted on 2/7/22 at 9:16 pm to Champagne
What does the Catholic Catechism say about Priests molesting children and how does the church address said priests?
Posted on 2/7/22 at 9:31 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
What does the Catholic Catechism say about Priests molesting children and how does the church address said priests?
Judas betrayed Christ for 30 pieces of silver. Judas was an Apostle. The Church that Christ founded was not destroyed by Judas and it won't be destroyed by others like the people you mention, who also betray Christ.
Do you abandon the Christian faith because Jesus, the Omniscient, made Judas an Apostle? Or did Jesus teach us the lesson that His Church contained sinners (awful sinners) from the very beginning?
From the very moment that Jesus founded His Church, which has existed since he walked the earth and since Pentecost, Jesus knew that some members and important leaders would be awful sinners. He knew that, right? I have decided that I will not abandon His Church because of Judas's awful sins. You may decide for yourself.
Posted on 2/8/22 at 1:02 am to catholictigerfan
quote:Cooperation implies that both man and God are working towards the same end, and that man contributes something positive towards his own salvation. That is not what the Bible teaches, but rather our "contribution" is faith which receives the promises of God, yet that faith is a gift of God (Eph. 2), so it turns out that we don't even contribute that. We have faith, we don't perform or "do" faith as a work, essentially.
See I've never heard of the words synergism and monergenism. But correct me if I'm wrong. You definition is that Catholic co-operate with God's grace, while God does everything for you...But it makes sense to me that we would cooperate with God's grace, not that we are somehow lessening God but given that we have free will, he would give us the choice to chose him or not.
quote:Are not those things in Matthew 25 expressions of the works of the law? Did not Christ summarize the law (the 10 commandments) as loving God and loving your neighbor? Jesus said that if we do not love our neighbor, we do not love Him.
Matthew 25:31-46 suggests otherwise. What matters on the day of judgement according to Jesus? If we did good works for our neighbor. Does that mean we can save ourselves if we simply do good, NO. I've explained this before. But your whole furniture in the house analogy doesn't take into account the passage that clearly states those who did not care for their neighbor where condemned by God.
Yet we are also told that no man is justified by the works of the law (Rom. 3:20; Gal. 2:16), so what Jesus said cannot be at odds with this. What, then, does He mean? Since the elect are "born again" of the Spirit, and being born of the Spirit produces fruits of the Spirit, then we should expect that the fruits of the Spirit are an evidence of the indwelling of the Spirit, which resides in us as God's people. What Jesus is saying is in alignment with the rest of scripture, namely by their fruits you shall know them (Matt. 7:20).
In other words, if a person truly possesses a saving faith and trust in Christ, he will produce fruits that make it evident that he is of Christ and in Christ. If a person does not possess such fruits, it may be an evidence that he is not of Christ and in Christ, which means Jesus will say that He never knew them.
If I'm correct, my position can claim that both are true: namely that no man is justified by the works of the law but by faith alone, and also that no one who lives a life practicing disobedience will be saved. The connection is that the works do not justify, but are an evidence of that justification. Your position, however, cannot support both claims in order to be consistent with your belief that our works contribute or cooperate towards our justification in some way.
quote:Like I said previously, the analogy breaks down and is not perfect, but the point of the analogy is what matters, namely that there are some who appear to be connected with Christ as a branch is connected to a vine, yet possess no life that bears fruit. This isn't meant to be a picture of a loss of salvation, but a picture of the one who professes to belong to God (a professing Christian) or the nation of Israel that was given the promises of God and yet rejected His promises and were cut off due to their lack of faith. Israel as a nation was given the promises, yet they did not believe, so they were rejected. Those that did believe remained in union with the vine, while new branches (the Gentiles) would be grafted in based on their faith.
...Are there branches that are clearly a part of the vine/tree but produce no fruit? Yes that is clear to me. Those branches don't appear to be on the vine, they are in fact a part of the vine but bear no fruit. What does the vinedresser do with those branches he cuts them off and throws them into the fire another way to depict hell.
Even in John 15, Jesus first says that there are branches in Him that do not bear fruit but then goes on to say that if anyone abides in Him, he will bear fruit. How can He say both that being in Him will produce fruit while at the same time that there are branches in Him that do not bear fruit? Because the point is about those belonging to Christ will be evidenced by fruit while those who are not Christ’s will not bear fruit and will be cut off, as is the case with unbelievers that profess faith but do not actually possess it.
We're combining parables and analogies here, but the important thing to note in interpreting scripture is using scripture to interpret itself. Which interpretation best fits the context of the rest of scripture? I already gave the example of the sheep that Jesus provided, and He in no way indicated that He would lose any of His sheep; just the opposite, actually. And the rest of scripture bears this out.
quote:We are connected to Christ by faith, but we are not Christ. Jesus is the head of the Church and we are the body, but we are still separate. He is God and we are not. He is the groom and we are the bride. Christ is the vine and we are the branches. In this passage, Jesus clearly tells us that He is the vine and branches are something other than Himself. Even in your interpretation, you admit that we (the Church) make up both the branches that bear fruit and the branches that don't. I don't see how that can be true if we (the Church) are the vine.
Yes Jesus says he is the vine I do not deny that. HOWEVER, St. Paul explains that the Church is the Body of Christ. In a mysterious way Jesus is the Church and all the members of the Church make up his body.
quote:Yes, at least as an elementary explanation.
Ok let me make sure I know what you are suggesting. Are you saying that without grace we cannot move to do good, and have no free will. And when we are saved we are moved by the spirit to act good and not evil. Therefore again no free will.
quote:It's a difference of interpretation based on a presuppositional difference. You assume free will and therefore you interpret the scriptures in accordance with that presupposition, and I do the same with my presupposition that the scriptures teach that our wills are not free.
If this is what you hold than we have a philosophical difference not a scriptural difference. Your philosophy shapes the way you read the scripture, I would need to prove free will to you to change your view of scripture.
I've had these debates a lot over the years. While the issue appears to be about the freedom of the will, the true issue is about sovereignty: are we sovereign or is God?
quote:"[W]hatever does not proceed from faith is sin" -Rom. 14:23.
So can we. But you seem to disagree with this view.
Those who are not born again by God's grace through His Spirit cannot please God because whatever "good works" they may do (as we believe them to be) are not actually "good" if they are not done by faith, according to God. Therefore, the unregenerate person cannot choose to sin or not sin; all he can do is sin, even in his best works.
quote:This isn't about whether or not we have the freedom/ability to sin (we do) as Christians, but whether Christ has already paid for our sins on the cross. If we trust that His sacrifice was for us, then all of our sins (past, present, and future) are already paid for. There is no double jeopardy in having to pay for the same sins twice, once in Christ and once again in ourselves. He paid it all.
I need to read up on John 10 again, but this seems to come down to the idea of freedom again. If we have the freedom to choose to sin or not than we can be cut off. If not because the spirit always moves us to not sin than your right we can never be cut off.
This post was edited on 2/8/22 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 2/8/22 at 1:32 am to Champagne
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike the Catholic Church
The hoarded stolen incalculable wealth stored in their walled Vatican City and international pedophile sex cult is way up there.
What percentage of Catholics do you think have ever seen a catechism much less read one?
You can argue that the foundation of the church lies in the catechism but to pretend that the modern day Catholic Church is the only way to Christ or even close to following its own catechism is comical.
The hoarded stolen incalculable wealth stored in their walled Vatican City and international pedophile sex cult is way up there.
quote:
If you want to argue with Catholics, read the Catechism. It's all there, supported by Bible quotations and the writings of the men who were taught by the Apostles
What percentage of Catholics do you think have ever seen a catechism much less read one?
You can argue that the foundation of the church lies in the catechism but to pretend that the modern day Catholic Church is the only way to Christ or even close to following its own catechism is comical.
Posted on 2/8/22 at 1:36 am to Champagne
quote:
I have decided that I will not abandon His Church because of Judas's awful sins
So in your mind no matter what horrible evil atrocities the Catholic Church commits you’ll just keep supporting them without question?
Posted on 2/8/22 at 7:12 am to Diamondawg
quote:
What does the Catholic Catechism say about Priests molesting children and how does the church address said priests?
LINK
The sexual abuse crisis is a dark part of the Church's history and in some ways is not finished. But the Church at the same time has done a lot to respond to it including the link above.
BTW at-least at my local church (pretty sure it's this way at every Catholic Church in the country) you can't work with children without going through training on how to prevent child abuse and going through a background check.
Foo I respond later today, lots to respond to.
This post was edited on 2/8/22 at 7:13 am
Posted on 2/8/22 at 7:28 am to catholictigerfan
quote:
The sexual abuse crisis is a dark part of the Church's history
The Catholic Church has a ton of dark history because it is full of vain, gluttonous men who have perverted the teachings of Christ.
Never forget that it was the high priests of the Jewish synagogues who condemned and conspired to put Jesus on trial and ensure his death.
Men who corrupted the teachings of the Lord and crucified Jesus because he threatened their power.
The Catholic Church is full of flaws that need to be addressed not brushed off because oh well it happens. They constantly put themselves between you and God.
I’m not saying Catholic faith worshipers are evil or inherently bad. But their church hierarchy inarguably is full of evil, malice, and greed. And it needs to be rooted out.
Posted on 2/8/22 at 7:52 am to Nguyener
quote:
They constantly put themselves between you and God.
attempts to assess the church aggravates true believers so these threads only last until a few posters slam Christian teaching as a combo of childish nonsense in theory and typical human politics in practice.
Page 14 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News