Are Catholics saved or even christians?

[Johnv]

So, you don't think that the CCC or Trent is an accurate representation of the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory?

So, you don't think that a Catholic has a better understanding of the CCC or Trent teachings on the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory than you do?

What do you believe makes you a better authority to speak about Catholic doctrines than the Catholic Church?

What makes you think that a Baptist has a better understanding of Catholic doctrine than a Catholic?

 

[JohnDeereFan]

Here is something that Catholics and protestants do agree on. We agree that the blood of Our Redeemer is the true purgatory of souls; for in it are cleansed all the souls in the world

If the blood of "our Redeemer" (by which, I assume you mean Christ) is the true Purgatory, then why the need for an after death place called Purgatory where sinners must go to expiate their own sins?

Furthermore, if Christ's blood is the true Purgatory, then what is the purpose of praying for the dead, that they would be released from Purgatory?

 

[lori4dogs]

So, you don't think that the CCC or Trent is an accurate representation of the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory?

I find it interesting that the CCC and Trent say that Purgatory is for the expiation of sins, but you say it isn't. What do you believe makes you a better authority to speak about Catholic doctrines than the Catholic Church?

The Catechism does not say that a person gets saved in purgatory. Purgatory is FOR the saved. Period. You are wrong.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

So, you don't think that a Catholic has a better understanding of the CCC or Trent teachings on the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory than you do?

If they're a Catholic scholar or historian, then I could see how they might have a better understanding of it than I do, but I don't see why any one cannot plainly read the CCC or Trent's statements that Purgatory is for the expiation of sin and not be confident that they're saying that the purpose of Purgatory is for the expiation of sin.

What makes you think that a Baptist has a better understanding of Catholic doctrine than a Catholic?

First of all, you're assuming that I was always a Baptist. That would be false. I was taught by the same priests and nuns that the current-Catholics here were taught by.

Second, we're not talking about my understanding. I quoted Catholic sources so we're talking about the understanding of the Catholics behind the CCC and Trent, not me or any other Baptist.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

The Catechism does not say that a person gets saved in purgatory.

Then how do you explain the passage I cited for you that says that Purgatory is for the expiation of sin?

Purgatory is FOR the saved. Period. You are wrong.

If they're saved, then why do they need Purgatory?

 

[lori4dogs]

If the blood of "our Redeemer" (by which, I assume you mean Christ) is the true Purgatory, then why the need for an after death place called Purgatory where sinners must go to expiate their own sins?

Furthermore, if Christ's blood is the true Purgatory, then what is the purpose of praying for the dead, that they would be released from 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. This is because unless they are perfect they will not enter heaven because in the book of Revelation 21:27 St John Says "Nothing unclean shall enter it" (referring to heaven) . This is what the Catechism means 'expiation' for sin.

As to praying for the dead, I answered that in a previous post.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Your right, I think, that imputation being at the heart of the difference. As John stated, justification to a Roman Catholic is a process where righteousness is infused.

But what does the Bible say?

"But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 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:" Rom 3:21-22

What is seen here?

1. The righteousness of God without the law, or, without the works of the law, or, without man.

2. The Scriptures give witness to THIS righteousness, that is, God's righteousness.

3. This righteousness of God is by faith.

4. It is unto all and UPON all them that believe, Jew or Gentile.

However, even here the word Manifest indicates that there is an observable change in the believers. Still if you were to build steps where would this verse fall? Faith - to which the Prophets give witness - given to all equally - for there is not difference. It seems to be the begining argument not the end argument for Justification. In other words faith is the starting place not the end argument for Justification or Salvation. If you see what I mean.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Then how do you explain the passage I cited for you that says that Purgatory is for the expiation of sin?



If they're saved, then why do they need Purgatory?

I've already stated it. Theosis.

 

[lori4dogs]

BTW, I was not taught by nuns and priests. Most of my life I was taught by Baptist's.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

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

But if Christ has already perfected forever all those whom He has sanctified, what more "purification" is necessary?

How is Christ's perfection not perfect?

so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

Interesting choice of words.

Holiness is not something we "achieve". It is something that we're made when we're born again.

This is because unless they are perfect they will not enter heaven because in the book of Revelation 21:27 St John Says "Nothing unclean shall enter it" (referring to heaven) . This is what the Catechism means 'expiation' for sin.

But the Bible says that all born again believers are already perfected and purified.

As to praying for the dead, I answered that in a previous post.

No you didn't. You had not yet made the claim that Christ's blood is your Purgatory.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

However, even here the word Manifest indicates that there is an observable change in the believers. Still if you were to build steps where would this verse fall? Faith - to which the Prophets give witness - given to all equally - for there is not difference. It seems to be the begining argument not the end argument for Justification. In other words faith is the starting place not the end argument for Justification or Salvation. If you see what I mean.

Why do you think that the text is saying that the righteousness of God is manifest in believers?

And no, the text itself does not teach me that this is the beginning. What it does teach me is that God's righteousnes, not my own, is what I need...and that it is given to me, as it were, as a gift on the basis of faith, apart from the works of the law.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Why do you think that the text is saying that the righteousness of God is manifest in believers?

And no, the text itself does not teach me that this is the beginning. What it does teach me is that God's righteousnes, not my own, is what I need...and that it is given to me, as it were, as a gift on the basis of faith, apart from the works of the law.

However what does Paul say next? Its obviously that we are "justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Jesus Christ" so then what is meant by redemption? and you see where the catholics are going with it. Note what Paul says here

1What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
5If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. 6For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

8Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

11In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires.

BTW that avatar rocks!

 

[ReformedBaptist]

However what does Paul say next? Its obviously that we are "justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Jesus Christ" so then what is meant by redemption? and you see where the catholics are going with it. Note what Paul says here
BTW that avatar rocks!

I know where Roman Catholics go with the teaching. The so blur the line between sanctification and justification that justification becomes indistiguishable from sanctification. And being considered just by an All Holy God means the person themselves are made just and then because they are just, are justified.

This is not the Bible's teaching. The Bible's teaching is that we are justified based on God's righteousness and not our own. It is not our obedience but Christ's. If we do as the papacy says, then we go about trying to create our righteousness, no matter how we believe it was obtained.

 

[DHK]

BTW, I was not taught by nuns and priests. Most of my life I was taught by Baptist's.

And now you are trying to understand Catholicism. No wonder you are confused!

The RCC does not really believe that Jesus died for their sins.
If they did they would not believe in Purgatory.
The doctrine of Purgatory says that one must be further "purged" of their sins.
The Bible teaches that Jesus paid the penalty for all our sins, he washed them white as snow. There is no purging needed. Purgatory is a pagan concept that goes contrary to all teaching of the Bible. It denies the sufficiency of the blood of Christ. It denies that Christ died for our sins and paid the penalty on the cross for our sins. It is one of the most blasphemous man-made doctrines ever invented.

 

[lori4dogs]

'The RCC does not really believe that Jesus died for their sins.'

Absolute nonsense! The Church believes that Jesus 'by His one oblation of Himself once offered made a full perfect, sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the whole world'.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Someone brought up the Joint Declaration on the doctrine of justification between the papacy and the Lutheran World Federation.

I have not read the whole statement yet. But I did want to ask as I look at it, where did the papacy change their view of justification?

You seemed like you were sincerely interested in this question back at this point of the discussion and nobody answered you. I posted this earlier in the thread.

Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

3. The Common Understanding of Justification
...
15.In faith we together hold the conviction that justification is the work of the triune God. The Father sent his Son into the world to save sinners. The foundation and presupposition of justification is the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. Justification thus means that Christ himself is our righteousness, in which we share through the Holy Spirit in accord with the will of the Father. Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works.
...
The Good Works of the Justified
...
38.According to Catholic understanding, good works, made possible by grace and the working of the Holy Spirit, contribute to growth in grace, so that the righteousness that comes from God is preserved and communion with Christ is deepened. When Catholics affirm the "meritorious" character of good works, they wish to say that, according to the biblical witness, a reward in heaven is promised to these works. Their intention is to emphasize the responsibility of persons for their actions, not to contest the character of those works as gifts, or far less to deny that justification always remains the unmerited gift of grace.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

You seemed like you were sincerely interested in this question back at this point of the discussion and nobody answered you. I posted this earlier in the thread.

Are you sayind that this statement means a change in essential doctrine on behalf of the papacy?

This is serious because past statements they believe are infallible from their church. I would think, rather, that they believe their current statement is not in conflict with with their present view in this declaration.

Which essentially means, their past statements, using their canons (and not their catechisms, because canons are infallible not catechisms) mean the same thing, however worded differently.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Are you sayind that this statement means a change in essential doctrine on behalf of the papacy?

This is serious because past statements they believe are infallible from their church. I would think, rather, that they believe their current statement is not in conflict with with their present view in this declaration.

Which essentially means, their past statements, using their canons (and not their catechisms, because canons are infallible not catechisms) mean the same thing, however worded differently.

I don't know how they approach previous statements that have clearly disagreed with the portion I highlighted. But one of the primary authors of this statement was Ratzinger before he became Pope and it is officially endorsed by the RCC. I would say it reflects a new position and I think we as protestants should celebrate that our RCC brethren are correcting what we consider to be wrong doctrine that has historically divided us for a long time.

They still do not subscribe to sola fide and I don't see that being resolved any time soon because of James 2.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I don't know how they approach previous statements that have clearly disagreed with the portion I highlighted. But one of the primary authors of this statement was Ratzinger before he became Pope and it is officially endorsed by the RCC. I would say it reflects a new position and I think we as protestants should celebrate that our RCC brethren are correcting what we consider to be wrong doctrine that has historically divided use for a long time.

They still do not subscribe to sola fide and I don't see that being resolved any time soon because of James 2.

The jury is still out for me. I don't see them confession forensic justification. So I am still a skeptic because that would essentially mean that Roman Catholic is not "Roman Catholic" anymore.

And for the record, they are not my brethren as best I can tell. So, you can say "my brethren"

 

[Gold Dragon]

The jury is still out for me. I don't see them confession forensic justification. So I am still a skeptic because that would essentially mean that Roman Catholic is not "Roman Catholic" anymore.

You have a definition of Roman Catholic that does not allow for what it is that they actually believe. That usually means your definition is wrong.