Featured The Catholic Church Is Not Entirely False And Does Worship The Biblical And Historical Jesus As God

And from the eternal perspective of God I agree with that, just as from the eternal perspective of God there is going to be One Fold, One Shepherd, and the Eternal State.

But it has not happened yet.

So too with justification, I take a different view than most, because I do not view, for one, Abraham's justification and declaration of righteousness to equate to Justification through the Blood of Christ. I think both Catholicism and Protestantism and Evangelism spend a great deal of time arguing about this Doctrine and both...have it wrong.

Does not James say "We see then that Abraham was not justified by faith alone, but by His works also?" While it is true that James is speaking about justification in the sight of men, and Paul justification in the sight of God...we still see that the justification was a result of efforts that reflect on Abraham...not Christ.

Abraham was justified, but, it was not until Christ died that Abraham was justified freely by the grace on an eternal level, based solely on what Christ did regardless of any effort on the part of Abraham. That is the sub-structure of the Gospel...mankind can do nothing to save, justify, or redeem Himself, that is why Christ had to come at a certain in human History, and die on the Cross.

And I realize most would view this as outrageous, and in conflict with Scripture, but I can assure you I have far more Biblical Basis to separate and distinguish Justification through faith in the Blood of Christ than anyone will ever have to argue Abraham, through works of the flesh, was Justified on an eternal level , which would demand the obvious conclusion Abraham did not need the Atonement Christ provides.

That is absolutely correct:


Hebrews 10:7-10
King James Version (KJV)

7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.



Romans 3:24-26
King James Version (KJV)

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.


There is a clear and distinct difference between the Economies of the Old Testament and the Age in which we live in now. Also with the revelation provided to us that was not provided to them. I think the centuries old debates continue, and never end, because too many people seek to prove the doctrine of their groups, and in doing so, their focus is narrowed to the justification of doctrine each group presents.

And I fundamentally disagree with that. One is not saved until they are in fact saved on an eternal level. Saved in the eternal perspective, yes, because the eternal destiny of the Elect is already known to God. But prior to our being reconciled to God we were separated from God in both the physical as well as Spiritual Realm. There is no connection, no union, between God and man prior to salvation in Christ.

That is man's problem. That is the malady that Christ is the Remedy for.

Not in the least, lol.

Continued...

 

I hope the above is understandable as it has been presented, and clears up any confusion there might have been.

I would agree, but, keep in mind that knowing the mind of God is not arrogance, it is the promise of God, and the very reason why we have Scripture. He gave us His Word that we might know His Will, which is knowing the mind of God. But perhaps you are just speaking about knowing God's motivations from eternity past, but again, that is the purpose of revelation. I just spent one day on a supposed Independent Fundamental Baptist Forum, and that was all it took for me to decide I will not spend any time there. The Moderation, as it is on many forums, is unjust and one in particular was more interested in growing a social club rather than moderating Biblical and Christian Discussion and Debate. Several there seemed to think it was strange I did not "socialize" before starting threads and discussing Doctrine, and two, without regard to the OP, personally attacked me, without a word from moderation.

That is clearly not the will of God, and judging on their knowledge of Scripture, I would say that this forum is a good example of why God gave us His Word.

Agreed, that is why we call the knowledge God gives us revelation. It has been revealed to us.

Doesn't change the fact that there is a point in time, PRMYBptst, that you and I were enlightened to the Gospel truth, and were changed.

But was that righteousness the righteousness of Christ? Or, is this a "good report" as spoken of by the Writer of Hebrews?


Hebrews 11:13
King James Version (KJV)

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.


Hebrews 11:39-40
King James Version (KJV)

39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.


"All these" includes Abraham, who did not receive the promises of God, they did not receive the promise, defined as being "made perfect," which is according to the broader context of Hebrews a reference to being made complete in regards to remission of sins. Abraham still had to have Christ die in his stead, despite receiving a good report through faith.

His faith did not nullify his sin debt, and it is not until the righteousness of Christ was imputed to him that his Justification was on an eternal basis, rather than eternal.

You are absolutely correct. Do not let majority embrace of popular pulpit theology dissuade you, nor be discouraged that there are so many that will disagree with you.


John 18:11
King James Version (KJV)

11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

I have to disagree with that. We see people declared righteous before God (Noah, Abraham, Zacharias, Elisabeth) but that is not to be equated to Eternal Redemption which was obtained by Christ Alone. There is a righteousness on the part of men in the temporal, and it is this, in my own studies, that is in view when Paul and James speak of Abraham. But there is a righteousness that is imputed to men when they are Sanctified by the Blood of Christ, and this righteousness is completely separate from any works they do.

Salvation is wholly the Work of Holy God, He is Sovereign. Man does not contribute to the Work of the Cross at all, not even...when they believe. Because it is God that intervenes and enlightens the natural mind to the truth of the Gospel, and it is at that point where both those who receive as well as those who reject become "believers" of the truth shown them. One simply cannot fail to believe truths God shows them, It might be likened to me walking in your house and saying, "PB, your car is on fire." Now, knowing what a humorous guy I am, you might think I am kidding. You walk out to humor me, and in fact your car is on fire.

Do you have a choice to believe me then? No, it is a matter of simply accepting the truth you have been shown, and that is the way enlightenment works. This is why we see Peter speak of False teachers...having received the knowledge of the truth, the way of righteousness.

And didn't mean to go on so long. Hope that clears up my position concerning Justification.

God bless.

 

Luther had NO problems with the 66 books of the canon, just did not find the RCC stance as getting theology from bogus extra revelation books as being right!

 

Except that your church addes extra biblical non canon books as sources of much of your theology, see traditions of men equal to inspired scriptures, and deny that a sinner is saved by the Cross alone, as you make salvation to be in the sacramental graces of the RCC itself!

 

Walter,

Denominations are secondary to being made alive in Christ.

There is a remnant of Christians in the Roman church that understand redemption comes one and for all via adoption by God into His family.

 

You did not answer this specific question from notadoctor:

" ...and from what source do we know that Jesus Christ established this Universal Church?"

Please answer the question as best you can. I am curious to know the source that makes the church of Rome the universal church.

 

Except that God commands us to come out of their and to be separate, for what has light to do with darkness? And we KNOW that the RCC is not a the true interpreter of scriptures, as the Holy Spirit will not contradict Himself, as much of their theology does the bible!

 

And God would ask them to depart!

 

Do you honestly believe the Medici family was Spirit lead? Darrell, there have been some terribly corrupt Popes throughout history. Popes have taught a false doctrine of indulgences for centuries and the current Pope continues the false teaching today.
No, Spirit lead leadership is hard to find in the Roman church.

 

Why would the Spirit of truth lead a church that denies the essential truths of the faith concerning the Cross/salvation itself?

 

Adonia, why do you defend traditions of men and not the teaching of God in His word?
You seem like a good person, buy I do not understand this reliance on church tradition above Scripture itself.

 

We don't know that, Yeshua1. God may ordain that they remain and preach the gospel from within the denomination. Of course they may be eventually burned at the stake, but I do not condemn a believer for remaining. Luther did not want to leave, he only wanted reform.

 

Perhaps, but they would not be that effective in changing the beliefs of the vatican, and if used by God to change catholics, they would be moved out anyways!

 

True, but God may use them to draw His chosen/elect/adopted children to Himself. We are not privy to the workings of our Great King.

 

The books of the Scriptures that we had been using for all the time before Luther were those decided upon by the Church as a whole way back in the 4th century, not one person.

You call what the Church came up with as "traditions of men", but the Catholic Church doctrines were inspired by the Holy Spirit as they looked at the Scriptures, the same as you claim as you interpret them.

 

Luther did not only want reform he wanted to change things drastically, and his refiguring of the Holy Scriptures is the prime evidence of this.

 

Yeshua, I get it...you don't like the Catholic Church.


God bless.

 

Because they make sense and align with the Scriptures. For example, our worship service was established long before the Scriptures were brought together as a whole. St. Justin Martyr describes this in his letters in the year 155. This is why St. Paul writes of the traditions that had been passed down and the way of worship was one of those traditions that had been established, much like your tradition accentuates the sermon during worship.

I like what a Mr. Michael David writes on his website "From Protestant to Catholic". He wrote: "It is worth noting that he (Justin Martyr) was describing the practice of the Church in Rome, which was regarded as the center of the civilized world, and was already holding a place of prominence in decision-making within the whole Church (as described in the writings of early Church fathers St. Ignatius of Antioch and St. Clement of Rome). This Church was violently persecuted by the pagan Roman government of the time, and the reason wasn’t because they were stealing those pesky pagan rituals".

 

I have no idea who the Medici family is, because I do not make it a habit of studying groups or their histories, just study of the Word of God and I use that when I interact with someone from any faith.

As far as corrupt popes, there have been many corrupt leaders in Protestant and Evangelical circles as well. Its just going to happen. That doesn't mean there are no sincere born again believers among that group, and if we are to show that we have a concern for lost souls, and believe the doctrine they have embraced is damnable, then we need to witness to those people on a personal level (unless you think you can get access to the pope, and seek to yourself reform Catholicism, lol).

As far as indulgences, I suggest you read the actual Official Catholic Statement about those, and you might find you do not have such a good argument after all. Personally I view Indulgences on a par with not just the typical Baptist teaching concerning tithing, but the way that this teaching translates and is applied by many Baptists, who often, though perhaps unintentionally, begin to equate their relationship with their "tithing," for which we could just as easily lay a charge of "works-based salvation."

The simple truth, MennoSota, is that we are not really going to make a lot pf progress in winning men to Christ by attacking their faith or religion. We are only going to lead men to Christ by presenting the Gospel, and the truth is, w don't need to bash Catholics to convey the Gospel. Secondly, it is the Holy Spirit that is going to convict, not those used to convey the Gospel itself, and it is only the Gospel that He is going to use to enlighten men.

Sorry, but I just get tired of seeing the same debates over and over on the same topics, between the same people, and nothing...is accomplished.

Stick to Christian Doctrine. Discuss the reasons why, and don't let emotion break down communication of the Gospel to a name-calling event. And I am not saying you are doing this, because to be honest, I don't usually get involved in these discussions.

You want to witness to Catholics, great. Take them to the Word of God...only. When it gets personal then nothing is accomplished. And as I have said before, I do not view the Catholic Church as a cult, and I believe there is enough evidence to state dogmatically that there have been, and are, sincere born again Christians who also happen to be Catholics. Do I see error in their Doctrine, sure. But I see error in Calvinist's, Arminian's, and Charismatic's Doctrine, and pretty much any group that calls itself by the Name of Christ...and I don't think they are bereft of sincere believers. If there is someone involved in a group that they are not saved through, at the very least they are people who are more likely to be saved than Atheists or some religion that denies Christ. We should be like kids in a candy shop, and what is usually seen are bulls in china shops.

And it is just a sad fact that for some people, a means of justifying their own "salvation" is by questioning and ridiculing the "salvation" of another. Again, its the same thing we see with children, they pick on others to make themselves feel better about themselves. And the fact is, we don't need to be derisive about someone else's faith that our own faith be edified, our own faith is edified by our very relationship with God.


God bless.

 

Sorry. The Scriptures and the historical fact. Come on, you know the passages - "You are Peter and upon this rock......". The "binding and loosing" power. The fact that there was only one entity, led by the Bishop's, those same people who called the various synods and councils. So from this power as things went on traditions were established and handed down. This pretty much was the score until the great schism between East and West in 1054. What, none of that stuff happened?