if the pope dies

AngelforChrist
"mioque , I am sorry that you consider anything us and them , because I am only on one side and thats Gods which is the side of truth as the goal . "
In that case you might want to consider avoiding this section of the board, not because I don't want you here, but because what is going on around here has very little to do with God's thruth and everything with churchpolitics.

"As far as even in your bleaker moments me sinning against you , considering my post above was the first time ive ever spoken to you , im confused about how that could be ."
It has more to do with the influence of my emotional state on my perceptions than with your actions.

"I am also baptist so that whole paragraph made no sense to me as to why you attack me because of what you claimed?"
You assumed I was Roman Catholic and you assumed I maliciously attacked you personally when I creatively reinterpretated the meaning of one of your posts. You assume to much.

"All people deserve respect and painting charicatures of people because they share a common belief system doesnt make them all act the same . "
Excellent point.
You'll find that few in "Other Religions / Doctrines " live by it.

Originally posted by AngelforChrist:
Carson writes: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Protestantism asks the Christian to trust in the Lord.

Yet, another truth Protestantism has inherited from Catholicism.

Click to expand...

Im sorry , but that truth I learned from the calling of the Holy Spirit and the bible , I didnt even know what catholisism was at the time. Does this claim mean you believe the bible and truth of God was only here because of the RCC?


God testified to himself to us long before the RCC existed . </font>[/QUOTE]Funny, that is not how the Bible itself says you will get the complete truth (though certainly a part of it and we would not disagree with your above statement.. Check out Jer 3:15 "I will give you SHEPHERDS after my own heart who will give you KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING". Fast forward about a thousand years. Jesus says to Peter, "feed my sheep". Fast forward another 50 or so. Peter in his epistles calls upon those whom succeed him to be good shepherds in his epistles.

Hi Ray,

I hear what you are saying.

Good. Then I will expect for you to never again say that Catholics believe they are saved by any merit on their own part.

If I were to commit a deadly sin such as that enumerated in numerous instances by St. Paul and as described by St. John, then I will "fall from grace" as St. Paul puts it to the Gentiles in Galatia who were being tempted to put their trust in circumcision and the whole slew of Mosaic Works by means of the Judaizers.

To make the full, conscious choice never to partake in the supreme worship of God "in spirit and truth" again while I am a Christian "on the way" would entail a very serious sin against the God I would supposedly have faith in. That would run quite contrary to the "obedience", which faith intrinsically entails, as St. Paul calls it in Romans 1:5 & 16:26.

Confession to a priest is never necessary unless if I were to commit such deadly sin; many Christians throughout the centuries have never received this sacrament, and many of them are canonized saints in the Church (i.e., recognized and acknowledged by the Church as among the Church Triumphant in heaven at this very moment).

Many have never read the Bible, included the millions who have gone illiterate their entire lives throughout the centuries, among whom are canonized saints as well.

Your hangup, Ray, is with whether there is sin, which can result in a "falling from grace" - not from whether our works save us. You are muddling two issues, one of which we have already debated at great length (i.e., mortal sin) - a debate I believe showed the ludicrousness and insufficiency of the Biblical basis of OSAS. I can only go so far with one who is committed to his/her tradition irregardless of what the Bible says.

Hi AngelforChrist,

You asked, "Does this claim mean you believe the bible and truth of God was only here because of the RCC?"

Absolutely, and this same claim is made by Protestant historians, esp. the Reformers themselves. Learn your history.

Angel for christ quote:

"Does this claim mean you believe the bible and truth of God was only here because of the RCC?"

Click to expand...

Martin Luther quote: "We concede-as we must- that so much of what they (the Catholic Church) say is true: that the papacy has God's word and the office of the apostles, and that we have received Holy Scriptures, Baptism, the Sacrement, and the pulpit from them. What would we know of these if it were not for them?

(Sermons on the Gospel of John, ch.'s 14-16 1537, in vol.24 of Luther's Works p. 304)

Carson Weber,

You said, 'Good. Then I will expect for you to never again say that Catholics believe
they are saved by any merit on their own part.'

Ray is saying, 'Just think you never had to think about Christian theology because you have been spoon fed with the Word and the Roman Catholic traditions and beliefs. You might among the most hard to convince of your gross errors. People who believe in eternal security know what I am saying, when I say, that Catholicism believes in faith plus works. And yet in your self-deception you think that you believe in pure grace. I wish you were allowed to trust only in Jesus Christ for your eternal life. I said I heard what you were saying, but this does not mean that I believe you know what you are talking about. How many times can a sinner be justified? And once a Christian errs is he or she rejustified each time they commit an mortal sin? Justification is a once for all spiritual even in the life of the sinner, while sanctification will continue until the hour of death or the rapture of the saints to Heaven.

I would love for you to enlighten we Protestants as to where in the Bible it classifies mortal sins and venial ones.

Carson said, 'If I were to commit a deadly sin such as that enumerated in numerous
instances by St. Paul and as described by St. John, then I will "fall from
grace" as St. Paul puts it to the Gentiles in Galatia who were being tempted
to put their trust in circumcision and the whole slew of Mosaic Works by
means of the Judaizers.

Ray is saying, 'You need to study your Galatian passage and then you will not make stupid remarks like you did.'

Confession to a priest is never necessary unless if I were to commit such
deadly sin.

Ray is saying, 'Someone taught me that you people believe what you said above. Thnaks anyway for the refresher . . . '

Your hangup, Ray, is with whether there is sin, which can result in a "falling
from grace" - not from whether our works save us.

My brother, you are the one who is struggling because it does not fit, just like O.J. Simpson's glove. I believe with the Apostle Paul that 'nothing can separate you and I from the love of Christ, our Lord.'

Carson said, 'You are muddling two issues . . . '

Ray is saying, 'When we look at your attempt to say you believe in justification by faith, we notice your utter confusion in this matter.'

Carson said, 'I can only go so far with one who is committed to his/her tradition irregardless of what the Bible says.'

If you knew my background you would know that I am committed to the truth and changed my belief only after mega years of studying the Bible. You are like so many Christians, sad to say, who have not had the privilege to study the Word with scholars and Biblical interpreters of His most precious Word. Your denomination is too committed to tradition and the study of what 'so-in-so pope' has said that you view the Word of God through the rose colored glasses of Catholicism.

If you think you can be justified before the Lord more than once, then you do not believe in justification by faith. The 'immutability of His counsel . . . ' [Hebrews 6:17] forbids Him the action of re-justifying a sinner more than once.

Luther got tired of trying to please the church with her rules and regulations, and he was more than overjoyed when he realized that he was justified only by his faith in Christ. [Romans 5:1]

many of them are canonized saints in the Church (i.e., recognized and acknowledged by the Church as among the Church Triumphant in heaven at this very moment).

Click to expand...

How can the church so declare these people canonized saints? It is God that justifies. Can the church, or any person search the heart and reins of another? How would you know that not one of these persons did not commit such a terrible sin without the knowledge of another individual? What kind of faith is this speaking?

Bro. Dallas

Rome has spoken, case is closed

Click to expand...

What does this mean? Is Rome God?

Bro. Dallas

Hi Ray,

Catholicism believes in faith plus works

Catholicism does not believe in faith plus works.

I wish you were allowed to trust only in Jesus Christ for your eternal life.

I trust in Jesus Christ alone for eternal life. All salvation comes from him by his grace.

How many times can a sinner be justified?

How many times can a sinner be reconciled to God? Are you a Donatist, restricting those who have fallen into sin from rejoining the fold?

Justification is a once for all spiritual even in the life of the sinner

If that is true, then you must admit that you have no existential assurance that you are justified because, as any honest 5-Point Calvinist will admit.

I would love for you to enlighten we Protestants as to where in the Bible it classifies mortal sins and venial ones.

I already have, in a past debate that we had. Either you want to reopen and old can of worms without good will or you have completely forgotten what I showed you repeatedly in our previous debate. I would say that the former has more likelihood.

You need to study your Galatian passage and then you will not make stupid remarks like you did.

In Galatians, Ch. 5, Verses 1 through 5, God's Word reads:

(A) For freedom Christ set us free; so stand firm and do not submit again to the yoke of slavery. It is I, Paul, who am telling you that (B) if you have yourselves circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. Once again I declare to every man who has himself circumcised that he is bound to observe the entire law. (C) You are separated from Christ, you who are trying to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we await the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only (D) faith working through love.

A. St. Paul is writing his converts at the church of the Galations. He addresses them by saying, "Christ set us free", "stand firm", "do not submit again to the yoke of slavery". These Christians addressed have been released from the slavery of Mosaic Law - they have converted & found faith in Jesus Christ.

B. The converts are commanded by St. Paul not to return to the former Mosaic Law they were held bound to; for if they do, Christ will no longer be a benefit to them, after he was of benefit to them in (A).

C. To have fallen from grace, the converts must have been in grace beforehand. When Christians, saved Christians, return to the justification of Mosaic Law, they become separated from Christ.

D. In further clarification, St. Paul clarifies that this Christian faith is a faith working through love, awaiting the hope of righteousness.

I believe with the Apostle Paul that 'nothing can separate you and I from the love of Christ, our Lord.'

Yes, that is what he said. And, if you read the verse in context, you will recognize that St. Paul is addressing the covenant curses, which entail human suffering. Paul's point is that suffering - far from separating us from God's love - unites us closer to Jesus Christ. Read Romans 8 and look up Psalm 44 in its original context, which Paul quotes here.

You are like so many Christians, sad to say, who have not had the privilege to study the Word with scholars and Biblical interpreters of His most precious Word.

I am a graduate student currently taking two graduate Bible classes under two scholars, one of whom reads from his Hebrew OT and Greek NT in class, translating as he reads as if he's reading from an English translation - a man steeped in the scholarship of Wright, Dodd, Meier, Brown, Fitzmyer, Cullman, etc. The other of whom owns a personal library of 70,000 books and heads up the St. Paul Center For Biblical Theology for which I work.

If you think you can be justified before the Lord more than once, then you do not believe in justification by faith.

Your conclusion is a non-sequitur. This is like saying, "If you are a Protestant, then you do not believe that the Bible is the Word of God." Your statement just doesn't make sense. To commit a mortal sin is precisely to lose faith. A 5-Point Calvinist would say that him who commits such sin never had faith to begin with, because such a man would be honest. Your system of interpretation is more prone to duplex veritas.

Luther got tired of trying to please the church with her rules and regulations, and he was more than overjoyed when he realized that he was justified only by his faith in Christ.

Luther had a poor Catholic education and was entrapped in a decadent nominalist philosophy. His positive affirmations concerning faith, grace, the sovereignty of God, and the authority of Scripture were all true, and the Reformation was fully justified in this regard. Luther essentially didn't know the Catholic faith, and as such, he is like many Catholics (and non-Catholics like you, Ray) today who believe that they think they know what the Church teaches when in all actuality, they have not a clue as to what the Church really teaches.

Originally posted by Frogman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Rome has spoken, case is closed

Click to expand...

What does this mean? Is Rome God?

Bro. Dallas </font>[/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Frogman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Frogman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Rome has spoken, case is closed

Click to expand...

What does this mean? Is Rome God?

Bro. Dallas </font>[/QUOTE] </font>[/QUOTE]Is there no simple answer?

Is it beginning to become evident why I would think the Roman Catholic system is a system of idolotry?

Bro. Dallas

Dallas,

The statement you quoted means that the buck stops with the Petrine Ministry entrusted with the authority of Jesus Christ.

If you want a good Bible-based serious backing of where the Pope is in the Bible, then I suggest reading Jesus, Peter & the Keys: A Scriptural Handbook on the Papacy by Scott Butler:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1882972546/qid=1065496930/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-5796742-0089450?v=glance&s=books

Thanks Carson. I am Missionary Baptist. So you know what I believe concerning Matt. 16.18. I just wanted to know the reasoning behind that statement.

BTW, I believe the buck stops with the Word of God.

If you are satisfied where you are at, I have no desire to convert you to the MB. I believe God is Sovereign and that He will save His people wherever they are found.

Thanks for the suggestion, I would like to return the favor and suggest that you read Matt. 16 in the context of your belief to see if Christ built his church upon the rock of Peter or upon the rock of the confession of Peter and that being revealed not by flesh and blood. IMHO, are the key words along with for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

I am sure this is in your Bible as well as mine and that means you don't have another book to buy

Thanks for the reply.

Bro. Dallas


While I have you talking to me let me ask another question:

I read on one post or the other that Catholics pray to the saints that they may take their requests to Christ and He to God the Father. What is the Catholic idea of heaven, either now or in eternity? I can not imagine, though many other denominations do teach it, that there are folks in heaven who are able to look down upon me, or that their focus on the Lamb of God can be interrupted by my prayers or needs or whatever.

If my question confuses sorry, but that is because I am confused as to why one who is saved by the work of Christ would have need to pray to or through anyone but Christ.

Carson writes: Hi AngelforChrist,

You asked, "Does this claim mean you believe the bible and truth of God was only here because of the RCC?"

Absolutely, and this same claim is made by Protestant historians, esp. the Reformers themselves. Learn your history.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your very arrogant and uninformed answer . This speaks directly to why I would never be part of the Roman Catholic Church . Jesus Christ himself quoted the full breadth of the Old testament scriptures LONG before there was a such thing as the Roman Catholic Church. The church started in jerusalem , not rome . The Old testament cannon was set long before there was a Roman church . God was revealing Himself to man long before there was a church and before Christ came to earth as a man and started the church . Seems you need to learn YOUR history .

To hear you tell it , the RCC created God . The books of the New testament even can be compiled in their entirety from Fathers writings as well and the RCC didnt exist till the end of the 3rd century . The jews cannonized the books of the Old testament , not the RCC so it seems you are quite wrong sir on many points .

May God bless you and reveal the truth to you through your arrogance . God has been revealing Himself to mankind since the begining , so unless you can show that the RCC existed since the begining , then your statement is ludicrous , because I said the BIBLE , not the cannon of the NT and I also said the TRUTH OF GOD.

Did you miss the parts of the bible where Christ said it went to the JEW first? Rome isnt jewish.

Christ quoted the FULL breadth of the Old testament scriptures HIMSELF - God gave the scriptures , not the RCC , even the RCCs division of the Old testament books are not accurate to the hebrew . The hebrew has 3 divisions , the law , the prophets , the writings . Their cannon ended with 2 chronicles , not malachai - Christ HIMSELF in both matthew and luke quotes this full breadth of scriptures calling it the keys of knowlege from the blood of righteous abel to the death of zechariahs between the stones of the temple which happened in 2 chronicles - so in effect Christ was quoting the full breadth of the scriptures at His time which was the death of abel in genesis to the death of zechariah in 2 chronicles .

Luke 11
50 that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple. Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation.
52 "Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter in yourselves, and those who were entering in you hindered."

On a side note , since Christ shows clearly that the "keys" are the scriptures or rather word of God , the keys that were given to peter was the gospel .

Learn your bible carson.

Carson Weber,

Theologically I am not a Five Point Calvinist. I am Arminian in theology, basicly. 1. Prevenient Grace {the working of the Spirit that goes before encouraging a sinner to believe in Jesus. 2. Election Conditioned by Faith In Christ. 3. Unlimited Atonement {anyone can come to Christ; He died for all sinners. 4. Resistible Grace {all sinners can resist His grace if they will to do so. 5. {Here I believe in something like Perseverence which is the fifth point of Calvinism} Here I am not Arminian in theology; I don't believe a true believer will ultimately fall away from God's grace and care. People who believe in Eternal Security are persuaded that Christ saves true believers are saved to the uttermost, [I John 5:18; John 3:16] and that justification can happen only once to a sinner. [Romans 5:1]

Originally posted by Carson Weber:
Luther essentially didn't know the Catholic faith, and as such, he is like many Catholics (and non-Catholics like you, Ray) today who believe that they think they know what the Church teaches when in all actuality, they have not a clue as to what the Church really teaches.

Click to expand...

Luther knew the Catholic faith of the 16th century. Your modern day "Catholic" faith is, to a certain extent, derived from councils and papal declarations that occurred after the Reformation.

Luther taught exactly what the councils and the fathers had always taught minus the abuses that had crept in. Luther was not an original thinker but he was not scholarly in the sense that Philip Mechanthon was. Mechanthon actually set out to prove that the "Lutherans" were not teaching any new doctrine. I would recommend Mechanthon's Unaltered Augsburg Confession, Defense of the Augsburg Confession, Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope to serious students of the Reformation. See link http://www.lcrusa.org/confessions.htm

[ October 07, 2003, 07:14 AM: Message edited by: John Gilmore ]

Hi Dallas,

you know what I believe concerning Matt. 16.18.

Yes, I would say that I have a good idea of what you believe (though "the rock" may be one of two items on your list.. Jesus or Peter's confession - or even both; Catholic interpretation doesn't preclude Peter's confession, as the New Catechism teaches) concerning Matthew 16:18, though I believe that a thorough study of the Old Testament and Matthew's use of the Old Testament shows that Jesus Christ, the Davidic King (the Christos), is appointing his Prime Minister in the New Covenant Kingdom as Shebnah and Eliakim both held this office in Isaiah 22:20-22. The parallelism is pretty obvious.

BTW, I believe the buck stops with the Word of God.

And the Catholic Church would agree. Ultimately, dogma is the Church's infallible interpretation of Scripture, as Scripture holds Primacy in Catholic Theology due to its unique status as inspired and God-breathed. However, Scripture cannot be Scripture without a living Apostolic Tradition and an authoritative mouthpiece for Scripture was written in an authentic Apostolic Tradition as it itself points to this Tradition and necessitates an authoritative interpreter, for it cannot interpret itself. The Magisterium (Latin for "Teaching authority") of the New Covenant Church is the servant of the Word of God and has no place above or even beside it. It exists for the purpose of promulgating and preserving/guarding this Word.

I would like to return the favor and suggest that you read Matt. 16 in the context of your belief to see if Christ built his church upon the rock of Peter or upon the rock of the confession of Peter

This is the best online exposition of this verse I have found on the Internet:

http://www.catholic-convert.com/Portals/57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/Documents/peter6.doc

Are you familiar with the famous Protestant exegete Oscar Cullman?

"The Aramaic original of the saying enables us to assert with confidence the formal and material identity between p tra [petra] and P tros; P tros = p tra. . . . The idea of the Reformers that He is referring to the faith of Peter is quite inconceivable . . . for there is no reference here to the faith of Peter. Rather, the parallelism of 'thou art Rock' and 'on this rock I will build' shows that the second rock can only be the same as the first . It is thus evident that Jesus is referring to Peter, to whom he has given the name Rock. . . . To this extent Roman Catholic exegesis is right and all Protestant attempts to evade this interpretation are to be rejected." (1)

1. Oscar Cullman, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1968 ), 6:98, 108.

I can not imagine, though many other denominations do teach it, that there are folks in heaven who are able to look down upon me, or that their focus on the Lamb of God can be interrupted by my prayers or needs or whatever.

Well, this is precisely the image of heaven that John the Seer presents in his Apocalypsis (Eng. Revelation).

"And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints" (Revelation 5)

In John's heavenly vision (NB: on "the Lord's Day" {Rev. 1:10}, the Christian day of worship in the Early Church and still today) entails the presbyteroi in heaven offering the prayers of the holy ones (that's us, brother) before the throne of the Lamb.

Hi Angel,

The church started in jerusalem , not rome.

Did I say it started in Rome? "Roman" as a qualifier before "Church" designates the communion Christians share with the "Bishop of Rome" who is the successor of St. Peter who travelled from Jersusalem to Rome, where he died and was buried (you can visit his tomb and relics today during the Scavi tour, if you wish).

The Old testament cannon was set long before there was a Roman church.

Did the Israelites fight with this "cannon" or are you speaking of the "canon", which is the rule of Scripture?

Your current NT canon is a product of a particular council's decree that was ratified by the bishop of Rome.

Here's the decree from Canon 29 of the Council of Hippo in 393 A.D. -

"Besides the canonical Scriptures, nothing shall be read in the church under the title of divine writings. The canonical books are:---Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings [i.e., 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings], the two books of Chronicles, Job, the Psalms of David, the five books of Solomon [i.e., Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus], the twelve books of the Prophets [i.e., Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi], Isaiah, Jeremiah [including Baruch], Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras [i.e., Ezra, Nehemiah], two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament are:---the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of S. Paul, one Epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrews, two Epistles of S. Peter, three Epistles of S. John, the Epistle of S. James, the Epistle of S. Jude, the Revelation of S. John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the transmarine Church [i.e., the Roman church] shall be consulted."

Take note - the supposed Roman Catholic OT Apocrypha is ennumerated among this list.

God was revealing Himself to man long before there was a church and before Christ came to earth as a man and started the church.

Yes, that is correct.

The jews cannonized the books of the Old testament

Yes, they did, at Jamnia in 97 A.D. This same Council declared that Jesus Christ was a false prophet and a blasphemer.

May God bless you

Thank you. God bless you too.

Carson Weber,

'Originally posted by Carson Weber: Luther essentially didn't know the Catholic faith . . . '

Ray is saying, The Catholic Church does not put their hand of ordination of men who don't know what the Catholic Church teaches. And when you use the word, 'essentially' you infer that he did not know the greater part of what the church stands for and believes. Come on, Carson, most of us on the board were not born on September 1, 2003.

The truth is that Martin Luther was enlightened to the Apostolic belief that all sinners are justified by faith. [Romans 5:1] Oh, Luther knew the ins and outs of Catholicism, and saw the door of free grace opened to himself and stepped into the 'Promise Land' of a new freedom in Christ.

So by your statement about, 'Luther not knowing essentially about the Catholic faith,' if this were true, would not speak well at all as to those who placed their hands on his head by way of Christian ordination into the ministry.

Luther saw the monkey on his back and got that distractive one off him who demanded 'a basket full of good works and church rules' in order to enter into eternal life, but only after passing through the fires of Purgatory. His mental confusion came about because he formed his thinking first around the conceptual ideas of Catholicism in the first place.