NOBLE ARMY OF "HERETICS"

(Adam)
And here we see works placed in their proper perspective...flowing from our justification before God, but in no way shape or form contributing to it.

(Grace)
Wow, what an inspiration you are. The bare minimum, eh? Congrats. Might as well just sin to your hearts content, too! As long as your saved, you don't need to do anything, so why try, right?

You guys don 't make sense. Adam says works do not contribute to our justification. Grace says they do and quotes: "See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." James 2:24

And you call that perfect unity?

And you might justify the following paragraph by including myself to be within the RCC whether I want to or not. I choose not to accept that appointment...thanks anyhow! All men who are saved are NOT saved through whatever church this statement is meant to portray as the "mother".

"God established a Church. If you are saved, it is through His Church. The Church is your mother whether you reject her or not. The Church is the mother of all mankind that Jesus redeemed on the cross. This is the gospel of Jesus Christ. All
men and women who are saved are saved through His Church. Christianity without the Church Jesus Christ established isn't the gospel."

 

I'm confused? I didn't say that...D28guy did...

 

Singer, you misquoted me as well (in the bolded portion).

 

Adam,

My mistake; J.S. gave us the James 2:24 scripture instead of you and you're right, Adam, it was Mike who quoted the following and yet I hoped for a minute that you might actually believe it.

(Quoting Mike) "And here we see works placed in their proper perspective...flowing from our justification before God, but in no way
shape or form contributing to it".

Okay, now you're back in unity......believing that works contribute to our justification.

 

Works of the law naturally, do nothing to contribute to our salvation. We are justified through the grace of God:

Romans 3:20-25
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
[21] But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; [22] Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: [23] For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; [24] Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: [25] Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

The God of the New Testament is the same of the God of the Old Testament. And the two covenants work together perfectly and beautifully, culminating in Christ fulfilling all that was spoken in the old to give us the new. Lest we forget we are sorely lucky as gentiles to be offered salvation from sin and death.

 

Good scripture, Adam.
The faith that you exercise is sufficient and equal to that of any of your Catholic brothers.

Singer

 

Anyways...

 

Anyway, there's no reason to join that noble army of heretics known as the RCC!

 

It has already been shown that Protestants and Jews and other "heretics" were condemned IN RC documents themselves.

It has already been shown that even today - the RC authorities hold that non-Catholics can NOT be saved under the Bible Gospel method - the New Covenant. Rather they insist that for these odd fellows to be saved - a non-Bible way must be "invented" and so the RCC graciously "invents a way".

And you Adam - have put a rather nice "face" on that "way" - as if "not-the-Bible" is a "good thing".

I applaud you for being so open minded.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Right Bob, where would we be without your infallible quoting?

 

GORSCH........J.S...do you guys really think Protestants are heretics?

(I know that was Bob's quote)
Singer

 

I quote from the RC sources - but I do not author them. The statement above would make "me" their author.


Abridged version, by Dave Armstrong, of "The Church Necessary for Salvation," chapter 10, pp.169-186 of The Spirit of Catholicism, by Karl Adam (Garden City, NY: Doubleday Image, 1924, translated by Dom Justin McCann).

This book (in the editor's opinion, anyway) is one of the very best expositions of Catholicism ever written: very eloquent, biblical, imaginative, appealing, and orthodox.

In it is found the following excellent treatment of the complex and multi-faceted question of how non-Catholic Christians are regarded by the Catholic Church historically

In Christ,

Bob

 

Catholic Digest 11/1997 pg 100
The question:
A Baptist family who lives across the street gave me a book called the “Trail of Blood”, by J.M. Carroll. It attacks Catholic doctrine on infant Baptism, indulgences, purgatory, and so on. But I am writing to learn if there is anything in history that would justify the following quotation:

The answer from Fr. Ken Ryan:

In the article above – Fr. Ken Ryan makes the meaning of “extermination” of that group and “many other groups” clear for modern readers.
Catholic apologists like Catholic Digest’s Fr. Ken Ryan quoted above often argue that the RCC isn't accountable for the Inquisition, since the state carried out the torturing and the executions. It was the RCC who defined these people as "heretics", however, and the RCC handed them over to the state (John 19:11).

We know from the decrees of Popes and councils that the RCC viewed itself as having authority over the state.

The Fourth Lateran Council, for example, the ecumenical council that dogmatized transubstantiation, declared (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html):

Other councils, such as Vienna, issued anti-Semitic decrees that ordered the persecution of Jews. The persecution of other groups, such as the Waldensians, was also ordered by the RCC.
For example, Pope Innocent VIII issued a bull in 1487 ordering that people "rise up in arms against" and "tread under foot" the Waldensians.
Roman Catholic and former Jesuit Peter de Rosa writes in Vicars of Christ (Crown Publishers, 1988),

The Catholic historian von Dollinger writes in The Pope and the Council,

 

Consider the following news stories from the Vatican City.

 

Interesting stuff, Bob.

 

Hi Bob,

Then why are many catholics here on the board have different views about inquisition.

They always pointed out that it is not the catholic church which was directly responsible for the murders in the past.

 

What is interesting Singer is that whenever Bob finds himself backed into a corner he starts posting his "sources" all over the place, albeit it's always the same few sources. This is what happens when you talk to yourself and don't actually read the discussion.

For example, Bob tries to show that Catholics are equivocating by quoting from Karl Adam. In actuality, what Karl Adam says is entirely in line with what all us Catholics have been saying. Bob is trying to invent disunity and inconsistency among Catholics but it simply won't get by a sane and thinking man. Mr. Adam asks: does that mean that all heretics and non-Catholics are destined to hell?... To which he clearly answers, "To begin with, it is certain that the declaration that there is no salvation outside the Church is not aimed at individual non-Catholics, at any persons as persons, but at non-Catholic churches and communions, in so far as they are non-Catholic communions." Bob even highlighted it but he failed to comphrend what it meant.

Then we get fed Bob's revisionism about the Inquisition. On the contrary the Popes were the most active persons of tolerance. As Durant says, "By and large, the popes were the most tolerant prelates in Christendom...'Had it not been for the Catholic Church,' writers a learned Jewish historian, 'the Jews would not have survived the Middle Ages in Christian Europe."

The Jews weren't apart of the Inquisition as Bob's arbiter of truth(i.e AP reports) falsely "reports". "Gregory IX, founder of the Inquisition, exempted the Jews from its operation or jurisdiction except when they tried to Judaize Christians, or attacked Christianity, or reverted to Judaism after conversion to Christianity; and in 1235 he issued a bull denouncing mob violence against Jews." (Durant 388)

These un-truths spring up when you put your agenda ahead of the facts as Mr. Ryan clearly has done.

 

What is interesting is that when quoting RC sources - RC members "ignore the details" because history "does not please them". This makes it easy for me to continually post sources that are going "without challenge".

Your post is a good example - of a non-response to the "details" which means the details "remain" and have gone unchallenged.

Here is a quote from you

You "still" have not responded to the point that that makes! Amazing!

See? It is really pretty simple. Facts. Details. Points without counter-points.

This has been a very difficult concept for our RC bretheren and they seem to find it "confusing" that the "details remain" when they go unchallenged .

In Christ,

Bob

 

Here is what "your own" historians say. [Though I would gladly ONLY quote from MY OWN group's historians]

In Christ,

Bob

 

Oops! Did I quote another "source???

That means that there will be details to ignore for our RC members.

Enjoy!

In Christ,

Bob