Reformed Churches Join Catholic-Lutheran Accord Regarding Justification

[Adonia]

Richard Barcellos is a very orthodox Reformed Baptist who adheres to the 1689 Baptist Confession of faith, and when he talks about 'means of grace' and 'sacraments' he means something very different to that which Roman Catholics mean.

Having said that, I wish with all my heart that Baptists would find other words to use instead of those terms, to avoid confusion as on this thread. Here is the 1689 Confession on the Lord's Supper, and you will note that it uses neither of those words:

Chapter 30: Of the Lord's Supper
1._____ The supper of the Lord Jesus was instituted by him the same night wherein he was betrayed, to be observed in his churches, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance, and shewing forth the sacrifice of himself in his death, confirmation of the faith of believers in all the benefits thereof, their spiritual nourishment, and growth in him, their further engagement in, and to all duties which they owe to him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other.
( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26; 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17,21 )
2._____ In this ordinance Christ is not offered up to his Father, nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sin of the quick or dead, but only a memorial of that one offering up of himself by himself upon the cross, once for all; and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God for the same. So that the popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most abominable, injurious to Christ's own sacrifice the alone propitiation for all the sins of the elect.
( Hebrews 9:25, 26, 28; 1 Corinthians 11:24; Matthew 26:26, 27 )
3._____ The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use, and to take and break the bread; to take the cup, and, they communicating also themselves, to give both to the communicants.
( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, etc. )
4._____ The denial of the cup to the people, worshipping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and reserving them for any pretended religious use, are all contrary to the nature of this ordinance, and to the institution of Christ.
( Matthew 26:26-28; Matthew 15:9; Exodus 20:4, 5 )
5._____ The outward elements in this ordinance, duly set apart to the use ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that truly, although in terms used figuratively, they are sometimes called by the names of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ, albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before.
( 1 Corinthians 11:27; 1 Corinthians 11:26-28 )
6._____ That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ's body and blood, commonly called transubstantiation, by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant not to Scripture alone, but even to common sense and reason, overthroweth the nature of the ordinance, and hath been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions, yea, of gross idolatries.
( Acts 3:21; Luke 14:6, 39; 1 Corinthians 11:24, 25 )
7._____ Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually receive, and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death; the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, but spiritually present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.
( 1 Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 )
8._____ All ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with Christ, so are they unworthy of the Lord's table, and cannot, without great sin against him, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto; yea, whosoever shall receive unworthily, are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, eating and drinking judgment to themselves.
( 2 Corinthians 6:14, 15; 1 Corinthians 11:29; Matthew 7:6 )

Article 7 is controversial, but the early Particular Baptists followed Calvin's view of the Supper rather than Zwingli's. Barcellos' book explains that.

Well thank you for clearing this up. From this work we can see that orthodox teaching and the Baptist version are very much at odds.

 

[Adonia]

Most of us enjoy matrimony, but for most it has no religious significance, and sadly for the RC priesthood, monks and nuns, the joys of matrimony are denied them by making the significance so significant that the real experience is denied them by the church.

Talk to our consecrated religious and you will find that to them the joys of uniting themselves fully and completely to Christ far outweigh the joys of matrimony. The Church denies them nothing, they freely embrace their calling of living a celibate life - as did St. Paul.


"Making the Eucharist a sacrifice rather than a sacrament denies the finished saving sacrifice of Christ". It does no such thing. It is simply called the "Sacrifice of the Mass", meaning a re-presentation of the ONE sacrifice on Calvary.

 

[utilyan]

That was not inspired by God though on the whole, so we would still see the Old testament as the one accepted by the Jews as the text to use, as it was in hebrew and Aramaic!

Good case Is the Sadducees vs Jesus Christ. In order to make fun of Jesus they chose to attack a particular scripture called TOBIT.

Tobit is a story of a woman who in the plot has been married 7 times but all her husbands were killed by a demon and required a brother/next of kid to marry. Thats the plot of Tobit.

The 8th guy Tobias has help from Angel Raphael to avoid being killed.

The Idea a woman got married 7 times to all brothers thats pretty insane. And the Saducees thought the same thing when they decided to POKE JESUS with this scripture, and we see Jesus Acknowledge it is scripture "not understanding the Scriptures"

Matthew 22

23On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him,24asking, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ 25“Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; 26so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh.27“Last of all, the woman died. 28“In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.”

29But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30“For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 31“But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:32‘I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” 33When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.





Here is a ANOTHER CHALLENGE:

2 Timothy 3
8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith. 9But they will not make further progress; for their folly will be obvious to all, just as Jannes’s and Jambres’s folly was also.


Sounds like our Calvinist buddies.^ Now Jesus, Paul, The Apostles, The Church we know who Jannes and Jambres is who opposed Moses.

Show me the verse in the old testamet that has the names Jannes and Jambres.

^its not in your old testament because your old testament is fake anti-christian product made decades after the death of Jesus.

 

[Yeshua1]

Good case Is the Sadducees vs Jesus Christ. In order to make fun of Jesus they chose to attack a particular scripture called TOBIT.

Tobit is a story of a woman who in the plot has been married 7 times but all her husbands were killed by a demon and required a brother/next of kid to marry. Thats the plot of Tobit.

The 8th guy Tobias has help from Angel Raphael to avoid being killed.

The Idea a woman got married 7 times to all brothers thats pretty insane. And the Saducees thought the same thing when they decided to POKE JESUS with this scripture, and we see Jesus Acknowledge it is scripture "not understanding the Scriptures"

Matthew 22

23On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him,24asking, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER.’ 25“Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; 26so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh.27“Last of all, the woman died. 28“In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.”

29But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30“For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 31“But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:32‘I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” 33When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.





Here is a ANOTHER CHALLENGE:

2 Timothy 3
8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith. 9But they will not make further progress; for their folly will be obvious to all, just as Jannes’s and Jambres’s folly was also.


Sounds like our Calvinist buddies.^ Now Jesus, Paul, The Apostles, The Church we know who Jannes and Jambres is who opposed Moses.

Show me the verse in the old testamet that has the names Jannes and Jambres.

^its not in your old testament because your old testament is fake anti-christian product made decades after the death of Jesus.

Actually, its inspired text written/recorded down for us by the Masoretic scribes!

 

[MennoSota]

Talk to our consecrated religious and you will find that to them the joys of uniting themselves fully and completely to Christ far outweigh the joys of matrimony. The Church denies them nothing, they freely embrace their calling of living a celibate life - as did St. Paul.

Wow, you really do bury your head in the sand when it comes to your church leaders, Adonia. The lawsuits throughout the world tell a different story.

 

[utilyan]

Actually, its inspired text written/recorded down for us by the Masoretic scribes!

Well then why does Jesus and the apostles quote the Septuagint?


Also show me in scripture who is Jannes and Jambres. Show me biblically who they are with bible evidence.

 

[utilyan]

To what extent do these impart the grace they are said to represent?

All churches baptize converts, so the Baptist practice is generally accepted, but how can baby baptism convey grace? My Anglican mother insisted that "we made you a Christian by baptism." I was confirmed at 12, and came to a living, saving faith in Christ at 18, and was baptized as a believer a few months later.

Most of us enjoy matrimony, but for most it has no religious significance, and sadly for the RC priesthood, monks and nuns, the joys of matrimony are denied them by making the significance so significant that the real experience is denied them by the church.

Making the Eucharist a sacrifice rather than a sacrament denies the finished saving sacrifice of Christ.

Now tell us, how does one who has participated in the sacraments become saved?

And how does the agreed statement on justification apply to the many nominal RCs ?

1 Corinthians 7

32But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; 33but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,

 

[MennoSota]

1 Corinthians 7

32But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; 33but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,

Except for all the pedophile priests...

Utilyan you are the master of abusing the scriptures for your own selfish purposes.

Shake my head.

 

[Adonia]

[

Wow, you really do bury your head in the sand when it comes to your church leaders, Adonia. The lawsuits throughout the world tell a different story.

No, I just have known personally many celibate religious and they are some of the most holy and content followers of Jesus Christ that I have ever known.

As for clergy sex abuse, it is also rampant amongst non-Catholic clergy and indefensible when done by anyone. I could repeat here news story after news story of Baptist ministers who have done such evil deeds but we all know it's the Catholic clergy who do such things who get the most press.

 

[MennoSota]

[


No, I just have known personally many celibate religious and they are some of the most holy and content followers of Jesus Christ that I have ever known.

Of course you do. I also know some holy and content followers of Mohammed, but that doesn't make there theology any more valid.

 

[utilyan]

Except for all the pedophile priests...

Utilyan you are the master of abusing the scriptures for your own selfish purposes.

Shake my head.

I never said anything, I just quoted scripture. By all means give me your exegesis.


1 Corinthians 7

32But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; 33but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I never said anything, I just quoted scripture. By all means give me your exegesis.


1 Corinthians 7

32But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; 33but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,

Why don't you give your exegesis of 1 Corinthains 7:2? 'Nevertheless because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife and let each woman have her own husband........it is better to marry than to burn' (v.7).

This from Donald Cozzens a leading Roman Catholic priest in America:

'An NBC report on celibacy and the clergy found that "anywhere from 23% and 58% of the [Roman] Catholic clergy have a homosexual orientation. Other studies find that approximately half of American priests and seminarians are homosexually orientated......Moreover, the percentage of gay men among religious congregations of priests I believed to be even higher........At issue at the beginning of the 21st Century is the growing perception-- one seldom contested by those who know the priesthood well-- that the priesthood is or is becoming a gay profession. [Donald B. Cozzens, 'The changing face of the Priesthood: A Reflection of the Priest's Crisis of soul.' The Liturgical Press, 2000]]

 

[Covenanter]

To what extent do these impart the grace they are said to represent?

All churches baptize converts, so the Baptist practice is generally accepted, but how can baby baptism convey grace? My Anglican mother insisted that "we made you a Christian by baptism." I was confirmed at 12, and came to a living, saving faith in Christ at 18, and was baptized as a believer a few months later.

Most of us enjoy matrimony, but for most it has no religious significance, and sadly for the RC priesthood, monks and nuns, the joys of matrimony are denied them by making the significance so significant that the real experience is denied them by the church.

Making the Eucharist a sacrifice rather than a sacrament denies the finished saving sacrifice of Christ.

Now tell us, how does one who has participated in the sacraments become saved?

And how does the agreed statement on justification apply to the many nominal RCs ?

Talk to our consecrated religious and you will find that to them the joys of uniting themselves fully and completely to Christ far outweigh the joys of matrimony. The Church denies them nothing, they freely embrace their calling of living a celibate life - as did St. Paul.


"Making the Eucharist a sacrifice rather than a sacrament denies the finished saving sacrifice of Christ". It does no such thing. It is simply called the "Sacrifice of the Mass", meaning a re-presentation of the ONE sacrifice on Calvary.

All the RC sacraments apart from matrimony/holy orders involve the physical experience - water, bread and wine, oil, etc.
Would you baptize without water, or recognize marriage without consummation, or anointing without oil?
Scripture specifically says:

Marriage is honourable for all
A bishop should be blameless, the husband of one wife​

No church dogma can possibly be justified that forbids marriage to its officers.

 

[Covenanter]

And how does the agreed doctrine of justification apply when you have confession/penance as sacraments?

 

[Adonia]

Of course you do. I also know some holy and content followers of Mohammed, but that doesn't make there theology any more valid.

And the same can be said about your theology - the theology of rejectionism.

 

[MennoSota]

And the same can be said about your theology - the theology of rejectionism.

Sure. The difference is that the Bible drives my theology while the commentaries of your church drive your theology.
It's no different than the Jewish Temple system that relied upon Jewish commentaries to interpret the law. Jesus pointed out how wrong they were in trusting tradition over scripture.
Your church is just like the Jewish Temple system. It adds a layer of commentary that is very often wrong. The primary text (scripture) does not agree with the Roman commentaries that often pervert the scriptures.

We have addressed the sacraments and veneration of Mary as just some of the perversions of Rome. The worst, however, is the adding of works for salvation and calling those works "grace." Many, many Romanists are in hell because they heard the church, but never heard the Savior.

 

[HankD]

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

HankD

 

[Yeshua1]

1 Corinthians 7

32But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; 33but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,

God gives the gift of celibacy, but he did NOT give to us Priests who all have to be in that state!
Even your "pope" peter had a wife, correct?

 

[Walter]

Except for all the pedophile priests...

Utilyan you are the master of abusing the scriptures for your own selfish purposes.

Shake my head.

How about all your pedophile Baptist pastors and youth workers?? Should you be throwing stones? Oh, and read especially the link to the 'cover-ups'.

StopBaptistPredators.org

hushitup

 

[MennoSota]

How about all your pedophile Baptist pastors and youth workers?? Should you be throwing stones? Oh, and read especially the link to the 'cover-ups'.

StopBaptistPredators.org

I never made a comment about how wonderful church leadership is. That was Adonia.
There is deep corruption in each one of us. By out own merit we utterly fall and God's law justly condemns us all to eternal damnation.
We desperately need a Redeemer and one who chooses to pardon us purely by grace.

As is often the case, you and the Romanists miss the forest for the trees.