Since you have been a Baptist, have you . . .

[PJ]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
Since you have been a Baptist, have you attended a Mass in a Roman Catholic Church?

Once, for a wedding.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Teh fact that the scholars 'proposed' their view means nothing. Jesus said 'Let the dead bury their dead'. The child of God is nowhere mentioned as dead in this context of dead. The child of God is very much full of life.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
Hope of Glory wrote,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Why would you yoke yourself to such practices as those that are openly anti-Christ?

It is my personal conviction that those individuals who deliberately and willfully make public statements that maliciously and slanderously represent the body of Christ have no hope in glory but will spend eternity in the fires of hell with the rest of the infidels!

Contrary to the blasphemous filth so eagerly circulated by some infidels who falsly call themselves Baptists, the Roman Catholic church holds to and teaches justification by faith in Christ:

</font>[/QUOTE]The exact quote that I was responding to: "What if it were a church that practiced bloodletting and denounced God? If it were a family member of yours who insisted before death that he or she did not want a christian funeral and wanted their funeral to be held at their blasphemous church?"

Then, you responded: "Of course, any Christian man would. But, of course, a man that is not a Christian may be so wicked and self righteous that he would not care enough to go."

Where do you draw the line? Would you go to a Satanic church to "honor" a family member? A Pagan church that practices animal sacrifice?

You may call me wicked and evil all you want, but I will not set foot in a religious ceremony that honors any god other than Yahweh. I may disagree with Catholic doctrine and Episcopal doctrine, but they worship the same God.

 

[PastorSBC1303]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
Teh fact that the scholars 'proposed' their view means nothing. Jesus said 'Let the dead bury their dead'. The child of God is nowhere mentioned as dead in this context of dead. The child of God is very much full of life.

Your Eisegesis of Scripture is frightening.

Doing that people can make Scripture say whatever they want.

Word studies are useless without the proper context of the passage.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

I do believe I used the proper context. Christ was looking for dedication, recruiting disciples. A disciple asked to go bury his father before serving the Lord. The Lord told him to let the dead bury the dead. We are to follow Christ first and foremost. If one is more concerned about family than following Christ, he is not worthy of Christ.

(My bad, I just saw that post was for sfiC. But I see we both see eye to eye on the subject.)

Christ first and foremost.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Amen, Diggin. I feel the same way!

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

And how does going to a funeral preclude one from following Christ?

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
Christ is not the only redemptor according to the Catholic faith. Mary is also a Redemptrix. She also shares the power to redeem people from sin, thereby removing the faith in Christ alone.

It absolutely amazes me that any Baptist living in the enlightened 20th-21ist century could possibly believe such grossly pitiful nonsense about the Roman Catholic Church.

The true teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on this issue was first taught in Latin and English speaking people with poor reading skills often have a difficult time understand Roman Catholic theology when it is expressed in English terminology.

The terms Co-redemtrix and Co-redeemer both use the Latin prefix cum that is found in many words in the English language meaning “with” in the sense of “accompaniment” or “associate with.” Compare the English word “co-worker.” Co-workers don’t do each other’s work; they work with each other.

When Roman Catholic theologians speak of Mary as the Co-redeemer they are speaking of Mary in her suffering at the cross. When Roman Catholic theologians speak of fellow Christians as co-redeemers they are speaking of our suffering with Christ and the part that we play in bringing the message of the gospel to others.

From the Roman Catholic point of view, co-redeemer does not suggest equality or partnership with, but dependence upon and subordination to the Redeemer who is Christ our Lord. Compare 1 Cor. 3:9,

1 Cor. 3:9. For we are God's co-workers; you are God's field, God's building. (NAB, 1971)

1 Cor. 3:9. For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building. (NASB, 1995)

1 Cor. 3:9. For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building. (KJV, 1769)

 

[Scott J]

That is still a description of a works based salvation even at its most benign. We are not an "associate with" Christ as the Redeemer. His work was all that is required... and all that is satisfactory.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by Scott J:
That is still a description of a works based salvation even at its most benign. We are not an "associate with" Christ as the Redeemer. His work was all that is required... and all that is satisfactory.

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
Teh fact that the scholars 'proposed' their view means nothing. Jesus said 'Let the dead bury their dead'. The child of God is nowhere mentioned as dead in this context of dead. The child of God is very much full of life.

Its not the view of scholars, its proven historical fact. When we interpret Scripture we must do so with a a historical approach as well as gramatical. Your arrogance is sad.

So would you go to a funeral of any unsaved family, say your mother, if it were held in a church other than Catholic?

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by C4K:
And how does going to a funeral preclude one from following Christ?

Exactally!

 

[Scott J]

That is probably about as good a response as I should have expected I suppose....

Being an "associate" is an active participant in "redemption"... which is by definition a cooperative or works based salvation.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by Scott J:
That is probably about as good a response as I should have expected I suppose....

Being an "associate" is an active participant in "redemption"... which is by definition a cooperative or works based salvation.

Contrary to the blasphemous filth so eagerly circulated by some infidels who falsly call themselves Baptists, the Roman Catholic church holds to and teaches justification by faith in Christ:

Here is the note on Romans 3:21-31 found in the second edition of the New Testament in the New American Bible:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The justice of God is his mercy whereby he declares guilty man innocent and makes him so. He does this, not as a result of the law, but apart form it (v 21); not because of any merit of man, but through forgiveness of his sins 9v 24), in virtue of the redemption wrought in Christ Jesus for all who believe (v 22, 24f). No man can boast of his own holiness, since it is God’s free gift (v 27), both to the Jew who practices circumcision out of faith, and to the Gentile who accepts faith without the Old Testament religious culture symbolized by circumcision (v 29f).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The text of Romans 3:21-31 in that translation of the Bible reads as follows:

21. But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, though testified to by the law and the prophets,
22. the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction;
23. all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God.
24. They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus,
25. whom God set forth as an expiation, through faith, by his blood, to prove his righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins previously committed,
26. through the forbearance of God--to prove his righteousness in the present time, that he might be righteous and justify the one who has faith in Jesus.
27. What occasion is there then for boasting? It is ruled out. On what principle, that of works? No, rather on the principle of faith.
28. For we consider that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the law.
29. Does God belong to Jews alone? Does he not belong to Gentiles, too? Yes, also to Gentiles,
30. for God is one and will justify the circumcised on the basis of faith and the uncircumcised through faith.
31. Are we then annulling the law by this faith? Of course not! On the contrary, we are supporting the law.

 

[Scott J]

What are purgatory, pennance, confession, and the mass all about Craig? Does the RCC teach that the 7 sacraments have salvific value? Does the RCC not teach that grace is something dispensed by the Church?

"Blasphemous filth"? Since when is it blasphemous to question the doctrinal teachings of the RCC?

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Scott J:
What are purgatory, pennance, confession, and the mass all about Craig? Does the RCC teach that the 7 sacraments have salvific value? Does the RCC not teach that grace is something dispensed by the Church?

Sanctification which is part of salvation and justification.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by Scott J:
What are purgatory, pennance, confession, and the mass all about Craig? Does the RCC teach that the 7 sacraments have salvific value? Does the RCC not teach that grace is something dispensed by the Church?

Have you ever tried to explain to a five-year-old how string theory tends to disprove the validity of quantum mechanics?

Originally posted by Scott J:
"Blasphemous filth"? Since when is it blasphemous to question the doctrinal teachings of the RCC?

There is nothing blasphemous about “questioning” the doctrinal teaching of any denomination, but when one makes false and malicious statements about the doctrinal teaching of any Christian denomination, that is blaspheming the body of Christ.

 

[webdog]

Sanctification stems from justification but it is not a part of it, or acquiring it. They are two totally separate things. The RCC teaches a sanctification based justification which is nothing more than justification by works.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by Scott J:
Being an "associate" is an active participant in "redemption"... which is by definition a cooperative or works based salvation.

When I purchased a house six years ago, realtors and attorneys and many others associated themselves with me in the purchase, but it was I and I alone who paid the price, and everyone who lives in the house knows that.

[ February 21, 2006, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: Craigbythesea ]

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by webdog:
Sanctification stems from justification but it is not a part of it, or acquiring it. They are two totally separate things. The RCC teaches a sanctification based justification which is nothing more than justification by works.

Not exactly.

Salvation past
initial justification
initial sanctification

Catholics and protestants may not agree to the terminology but both would agree that this is by grace without works. Catholics would say this happens through baptism which protestants would say is a work.

Salvation present
progressive justification
progressive sanctification

Both Catholics and protestants would agree that this involves works.

Salvation future
final justification
final sanctification

When we die we are finally justified/sanctified

Many protestants like to characterize justification as salvation past and sanctification as salvation present. But I believe a more biblical way of looking at it is seeing justification and sanctification as things that have a past, present and future element.