Love Alone Saves

[herbert]

Herberto, I am waiting for your biblical text regarding all the issues I brought up regarding Roman teachings. That is the issue you avoid like the plague.

Share your scripture with us.

"MennoSota,"

I don't know what sort of standards people are held to here on this site. I am, however, going to report you to the site directors, etc. Calling me Herbie or Herberto is, again, not kind or respectful. This, despite the fact that the Scriptures call Christians to treat all people with kindness and regard.

Finally, and this will be my last word on this (directly to you, at least... not because I shy away from challenges to my beliefs, but because of your unkindness)... I have not avoided anything here. As a matter of fact, I would have been perfectly happy speaking to each of the doctrines you raised. But since your original question was similar to "Have you stopped kicking your dog yet?" I was asking you to establish my guilt as far as kicking my dog goes... That's why I asked you to use Scripture to prove the standard you were using to dismiss others' doctrines, which you didn't do. Essentially, you just repeated the initial accusation by calling me Herberto and telling me to produce Scripture. Ultimately, though, everything you've said either presupposes the validity of your assessment of the situation or obviously begs the question (i.e. presupposes the very point which is in question between us). This, and your unkindness (and disregard for Scriptural calls to charity), have led me to recognize that you're not a person with whom respectful dialogue is likely to come about. If, however, steaver or another person wishes to pick up where you've left off, I would be happy to continue the conversation with such a person. Again, I don't shy away from challenges to my beliefs. That's why I, as an adult, left my Baptist Church and became a Catholic. I now deeply appreciate my background as a Baptist. But I see the Catholic Faith as the fullness of the Christian Faith.

In Him,

Herbert

 

[herbert]

Lol. Good Lord! Even you Herbert cannot accept the Word of Paul/God. Somehow people are just not understanding what Paul is saying and therefore Adonia, you are A ok in believing that these Jews will be saved.

You just lost all credibility Herbert.

steaver,

What do you mean by "even you Herbert cannot accept the Word of Paul/God"? I thought that I, as a Catholic, was already considered, in your mind, to have deserted the Word of God for "Rome's Doctrines." Also, I did little more than quote Scripture. The main point of my writing to Adonia was to refer to St. Paul. There's hardly a thought of mine to be found in that post by which I somehow lost all credibility. Again, the funny thing is this: If I lost all credibility by saying what I said, what kind of credibility did I have before I posted that? Finally, and for the record, I don't deny a single word of Scripture (or St. Paul). I affirm it all, 100%.

In Him,

Herbert

 

[MennoSota]

"MennoSota,"

I don't know what sort of standards people are held to here on this site. I am, however, going to report you to the site directors, etc. Calling me Herbie or Herberto is, again, not kind or respectful. This, despite the fact that the Scriptures call Christians to treat all people with kindness and regard.

Finally, and this will be my last word on this (directly to you, at least... not because I shy away from challenges to my beliefs, but because of your unkindness)... I have not avoided anything here. As a matter of fact, I would have been perfectly happy speaking to each of the doctrines you raised. But since your original question was similar to "Have you stopped kicking your dog yet?" I was asking you to establish my guilt as far as kicking my dog goes... That's why I asked you to use Scripture to prove the standard you were using to dismiss others' doctrines, which you didn't do. Essentially, you just repeated the initial accusation by calling me Herberto and telling me to produce Scripture. Ultimately, though, everything you've said either presupposes the validity of your assessment of the situation or obviously begs the question (i.e. presupposes the very point which is in question between us). This, and your unkindness (and disregard for Scriptural calls to charity), have led me to recognize that you're not a person with whom respectful dialogue is likely to come about. If, however, steaver or another person wishes to pick up where you've left off, I would be happy to continue the conversation with such a person. Again, I don't shy away from challenges to my beliefs. That's why I, as an adult, left my Baptist Church and became a Catholic. I now deeply appreciate my background as a Baptist. But I see the Catholic Faith as the fullness of the Christian Faith.

In Him,

Herbert

I don't see your scriptural proof for the dogma's of Rome that I brought up. Talk to us when you have biblical evidence.

 

[utilyan]

I don't see your scriptural proof for the dogma's of Rome that I brought up. Talk to us when you have biblical evidence.

Who's us? You don't belong to a church. You are your own pope.


Show me the official website.


Church of Backwards? is it www BackwardsChurch com?


Whats this mean backwards?

Matthew 6

14“For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15“But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

Oh that means if God forgives you and decides to make you elect THEN you can forgive others their transgressions.



What does this mean BACKWARDS CHURCH?

James 2

24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.


Oh that means that man is justified by FAITH ALONE and not by works.


What does this mean BACKWARDIANS?

1 timothy 2

3This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.


Well that means desires all cool peoples to be saved.


Well what does this mean Backward bill?

John 5

22“For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, 23so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.


Well God doesn't want ALL to honor the son as they honor the father, see the original scripture said "smALL will honor the son"




Well what does this mean BAKAka?

Luke 10

25And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”26And He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” 27And he answered, “YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” 28And He said to him, “You have answered correctly; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE.”

Well Jesus was kidding. what its really says is faith alone God just picks you.

 

[herbert]

If anyone wishes to pick up where "MennoSota" left off, allow me to frame this disagreement in terms which might help to bring about a fruitful dialogue:

When someone dismisses Christian doctrines on the grounds that they are not spelled out in Scripture or I might say when the test by which one judges Christian doctrines focuses upon the extent to which they are each spelled out in Scripture, such a test could be understood to invalidate itself if the test itself is not explicitly presented in Scripture.

Imagine, for example, that I was typing on a Dell computer and I wrote the following message on this forum: "Only posts typed on Apple computers are valid." Were I to type this, should I be surprised when people respond, saying "What kind of computer are you typing on?"? I don't think so. Or imagine if I presented a law which said "Only laws which are printed on pink paper are binding" and I printed that law on yellow paper, should I be surprised when someone points it out? This is essentially what "MennoSota" has done. I drew attention to the fact that his "law" was itself not printed on pink paper (and would thus fail its own standard) and he responded with another demand that my "laws" be printed on pink paper.

So it is that if someone wishes to dismiss Christian doctrines on the grounds that he doesn't find them to be sufficiently present in Scripture, am I not equally justified in dismissing those very grounds by which he's dismissed Christian doctrines on account of the fact that they themselves are not found in Scripture? Indeed, such a test for doctrinal veracity fails to live up to its own standard as there exists no Scripture which says something like "In order for a Christian doctrine to be deemed valid, it must be clearly presented in the Holy Scriptures."

I would be happy to discuss each and every one of the points "MennoSota" raised above. First things first, though. We must consider the respective frameworks according to which we test doctrines before we start dismissing each other's conclusions.

In Him,

Herbert

 

[herbert]

Now tell me where your sect gets it wrong? And which sect are you in anyway?


Don't worry, I am not a big fan of Pope Francis. His 2 predecessors were more to my liking, but God saw fit to see that Jorge Bergoglio became our Bishop, so that is that.

Adonia,

I always appreciate your comments. I want to say, however, that it is my impression that the Church does not teach that the appointment of a particular pope at a given point in time should be construed as God's divine sanction or approval of the man. Consider Pope John Paul the 1st. He was only Pope for about a month before his passing. A pope isn't, simply by becoming pope, sorta "approved" by the Holy Spirit, as I understand it... The same ever-corrupting machinations which afflict every human organization afflict the Church, as well. The promise we enjoy as Catholics isn't that we'll be spared from corruption even at the level of the papacy, it's that Christ's Church will endure despite horrendous corruption which may, at times, corrupt even a pope.

In Him,

Herbert

 

[MennoSota]

Who's us? You don't belong to a church. You are your own pope.

Show me the official website.

Church of Backwards? is it www BackwardsChurch com.

Nope. But I am of the priesthood of believers. See Peter for more details. The only King is Yeshua. May God's word guide me.

As to the other statements you made, we have gone over your poor exegesis before and you have been shown to be wrong. You are just too stubborn to admit it so I let you ramble on...

 

[MennoSota]

If anyone wishes to pick up where "MennoSota" left off, allow me to frame this disagreement in terms which might help to bring about a fruitful dialogue:

When someone dismisses Christian doctrines on the grounds that they are not spelled out in Scripture or I might say when the test by which one judges Christian doctrines focuses upon the extent to which they are each spelled out in Scripture, such a test could be understood to invalidate itself if the test itself is not explicitly presented in Scripture.

Imagine, for example, that I was typing on a Dell computer and I wrote the following message on this forum: "Only posts typed on Apple computers are valid." Were I to type this, should I be surprised when people respond, saying "What kind of computer are you typing on?"? I don't think so. Or imagine if I presented a law which said "Only laws which are printed on pink paper are binding" and I printed that law on yellow paper, should I be surprised when someone points it out? This is essentially what "MennoSota" has done. I drew attention to the fact that his "law" was itself not printed on pink paper (and would thus fail its own standard) and he responded with another demand that my "laws" be printed on pink paper.

So it is that if someone wishes to dismiss Christian doctrines on the grounds that he doesn't find them to be sufficiently present in Scripture, am I not equally justified in dismissing those very grounds by which he's dismissed Christian doctrines on account of the fact that they themselves are not found in Scripture? Indeed, such a test for doctrinal veracity fails to live up to its own standard as there exists no Scripture which says something like "In order for a Christian doctrine to be deemed valid, it must be clearly presented in the Holy Scriptures."

I would be happy to discuss each and every one of the points "MennoSota" raised above. First things first, though. We must consider the respective frameworks according to which we test doctrines before we start dismissing each other's conclusions.

In Him,

Herbert

All Christian doctrine is based in God's word or it is not doctrine, but instead it is false authority.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
[16]All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right.
[17]God uses it to prepare and equip his people to do every good work.

Not once is the Roman church given such authority.

Herberto, let God's word dwell in you richly. Let it correct the many errors taught you by the church at Rome.

 

[steaver]

We do not love God until He first loves us.

Winner!!

We can not, therefore, choose God because we hate God.

Now there you went and added Calvinism quotes.

 

[MennoSota]

Winner!!


Now there you went and added Calvinism quotes.

"There is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God."

Is that better.

Steaver, you refuse to accept what God tells us in His word.
Multiple times God tells us that he chooses. Multiple times He says we are adopted and predestined. This all merges perfectly with God telling us that love is not that we loved God, but that He first loved us.

I can only conclude that you would reject God's word in order to remain the lord of your own life while asking God to be your advisor. Problem is...when God tells you that He is your Sovereign King, you keep telling Him that He's just an advisor.

I find that sad.

 

[steaver]

Again, the funny thing is this: If I lost all credibility by saying what I said, what kind of credibility did I have before I posted that?

I seen you as a creditable Catholic who sincerely holds to the Catholic teaching, even though I believe you do so in error.

But then you confirm Adonia's belief that these Jews Paul speaks of are saved simply because they are God's chosen to reveal Himself to the world. Judas was a Jew, is he saved?

 

[steaver]

"There is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God."

Is that better.

Winner! God first seeks us!

Steaver, you refuse to accept what God tells us in His word.
Multiple times God tells us that he chooses. Multiple times He says we are adopted and predestined. This all merges perfectly with God telling us that love is not that we loved God, but that He first loved us.

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Jesus' will is to gather thy children together, and ye would not. Is man's will greater than Jesus' will?

I can only conclude that you would reject God's word in order to remain the lord of your own life while asking God to be your advisor.

Now there you go again, just can't resist that old worn out condescending Calvinism line. "Ye don't believe in Calvinism! Well then ye just want to be your own lord and have it your own way....."

 

[steaver]

I will await Adonia and Utilyan's affirmation that one cannot be saved if they reject Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour. I will gladly accept their confirmation that Jews and Muslims loving thy neighbour alone cannot save them, that they must not reject that Jesus Christ is the Son of God if they desire to be saved.

Hey let's end this debate guys!

Herbert says you guys most certainly don't believe a person can reject Jesus Christ and be saved by loving thy neighbour alone!

Please confirm! And I will say Amen!

 

[Adonia]

Adonia,

I always appreciate your comments. I want to say, however, that it is my impression that the Church does not teach that the appointment of a particular pope at a given point in time should be construed as God's divine sanction or approval of the man. Consider Pope John Paul the 1st. He was only Pope for about a month before his passing. A pope isn't, simply by becoming pope, sorta "approved" by the Holy Spirit, as I understand it... The same ever-corrupting machinations which afflict every human organization afflict the Church, as well. The promise we enjoy as Catholics isn't that we'll be spared from corruption even at the level of the papacy, it's that Christ's Church will endure despite horrendous corruption which may, at times, corrupt even a pope.

In Him,

Herbert

So you don't believe that the Holy Spirit was with those men who after much prayer voted to elect Jorge Bergoglio as the successor to Peter? Now if you truly feel that way, that surprises me.

 

[Adonia]

All Christian doctrine is based in God's word or it is not doctrine, but instead it is false authority.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
[16]All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right.
[17]God uses it to prepare and equip his people to do every good work.

Not once is the Roman church given such authority.

Herberto, let God's word dwell in you richly. Let it correct the many errors taught you by the church at Rome.

Really, what is it with you that you cannot seem to show respect to our brother in Christ, Mr. Herbert by calling him the name in which he has kindly asked you to call him? Why are you being obstinate and downright rude?

 

[Adonia]

I have many times and you ignore it. I posted Scripture for you where Paul says the Jews have a zeal for God and yet they are not saved. Your answer to this was you did not believe it, and neither does the RCC teach it, in SPITE of what Paul says (I can look up your quote). I have also posted Scripture where Jesus says if you do not believe He is the Christ, the Son of God, you will die in your sins, and you reject it as well.

So Herbert seems to believe that you do not believe that a person can reject that Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ , the Son of God, crucified for the sins of the world and still be saved by their love of neighbour. So let's see what Herbert has to say, he seems to believe there are no Catholics that would believe such a thing. I say there is two here on this board that do and what I was asking is why they would believe this way if the RCC does not teach such a thing?

St. Paul also says that men should not have long hair, that women should be quiet while in Church and that they should also have their heads covered while there. Are you in full agreement with those pronouncements?

 

[MennoSota]

Winner! God first seeks us!

God loves us. We don't love God. God doesn't have to seek. God knows. You have added seeking to the equation when it isn't there.

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Is that the verse you hang your theology on? No wonder it's so screwed up. Jesus is making a comment about Jerusalem within the context of knowing he is about to be killed.
It intrigues me that you would ignore the large number of passages that deal directly with God's choice and then cling to one verse out of context. Do you often proof text out of context, steaver?

Jesus' will is to gather thy children together, and ye would not. Is man's will greater than Jesus' will?

God's will is always accomplished according to His Sovereign plan.

Now there you go again, just can't resist that old worn out condescending Calvinism line. "Ye don't believe in Calvinism! Well then ye just want to be your own lord and have it your own way....."

I trust the Sovereign King who tells me I am adopted and predestined by His choice. Merely read Romans 8 and 9, Ephesians 1 and 2, as well as the other gospels and epistles that clearly tell us about God's Sovereign choice.

Steaver, this isn't Calvinism we are discussing. This is God's holy word given to you...yet you reject it. Why do you reject God's word for your own man-made pretext, using proof texts out of context? My conclusion is you want to be your own boss and thus cringe at God being your Master.

 

[MennoSota]

Really, what is it with you that you cannot seem to show respect to our brother in Christ, Mr. Herbert by calling him the name in which he has kindly asked you to call him? Why are you being obstinate and downright rude?

Why did Elijah mock the prophets of Baal on Mt Carmel?

 

[MennoSota]

Really, what is it with you that you cannot seem to show respect to our brother in Christ, Mr. Herbert by calling him the name in which he has kindly asked you to call him? Why are you being obstinate and downright rude?

You ignore the passage in 2 Timothy to whine about me calling him Herberto?

Why do you ignore the truth that God's word is profitable for doctrine, correction and instruction in righteousness?
Is there anything in that passage that includes the leaders of the church at Rome as being authorative and equal or greater than God's word? I don't see anything there in regards to Rome, but perhaps you have another allegory for me.

 

[MennoSota]

St. Paul also says that men should not have long hair, that women should be quiet while in Church and that they should also have their heads covered while there. Are you in full agreement with those pronouncements?

Context, Adonia, is your friend, not your enemy.