The Catholic "Salvation"

[Brother Adam]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Brother Adam:
That isn't to say that a Catholic doesn't have a personal relationship with Christ through faith, they are simply using the term differently. That is partly why Catholicism is often mistaken as the religion where one does "good works to achieve salvation".

It is because they are using the term differently that we realize they are teaching a false doctrine of works. We must use the term as the scriptures do. The scriptures say we are saved by grace through faith, not through faith in the various "graces" that the church has defined to suit her purpose.

Words are important and have meaning. We can't change the meaning and pretend to believe the same thing. If I am eating an apple and you are eating an orange but call it an apple are we actually eating the same thing? I don't think so.

~Lorelei </font>[/QUOTE]People will assign meanings to words as they choose. The English word "Salvation" to the 20th century American Reformed Protestant typically means "Eternal security attained through the verbal profession of trust in Jesus Christ as Personal Lord and Savior".

If you are eating an apple and call it an apple and I call it a manzana, doesn't make you right and me wrong. I have simply assigned a different vocal term to it (in this case Spanish).

 

[Gina B]

As a Catholic, I am open to hearing anyone's opposing viewpoint without the silent fear that perhaps there's something I don't know that might just show my faith to be insufficient or wrong on various points. I have an open mind and an open heart with a faith that seeks further understanding.

I'm glad you think so, but am afraid you're mistaken. That has been shown over and over by your refusal to accept the inspired word of God's teachings over the words of a "church". As long as you continue to close your mind to the thought that your church is not infallible in its teachings and that it goes against scriptures in vital areas, your heart is not open to seek further understanding about anything besides the false teachings of the Catholic church.
Gina

 

[Brother Adam]

Originally posted by Singer:
We've all seen the claim of the Catholic Church as was posted earlier:

"Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation."

It is written throughout their history and that quote to the most simple or the most advanced mind still appears to mean that salvation is not available to anyone who is not a Catholic by denomination.

Adam will come back tomorrow with his Catholic insight to tell us that we're reading it wrong and that it means something else.

Are we being taken for a bunch of idiots or what?

It means exactly what it says. And as a protestant who denies that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, I have no problem with it.

Now to say that I've either completely lost it, or actually read the catachism....

 

[Brother Adam]

"I believe the majority of Catholics are not Christians"

Funny, Dr. Bob Griffin feels the same way about Baptists

"That has been shown over and over by your refusal to accept the inspired word of God's teachings over the words of a "church"."

As do you Gina, ascribe your faith, beliefs, and practices to a Church- that is, the principals and teachings of the Baptist Church in America, who uses the scriptures to form doctrines.

 

[Singer]

It means exactly what it says. And as a protestant who denies that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, I have no problem with it.

Then you haven't been listening to the many Catholics on this board who make the claim that there IS salvation amongst Protestants; although in an incomplete way. . . (whatever that means)!

That claim, right there, falsifies the claim made by their own Vatican Council that there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

 

[Brother Adam]

Originally posted by Singer:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> It means exactly what it says. And as a protestant who denies that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, I have no problem with it.

Then you haven't been listening to the many Catholics on this board who make the claim that there IS salvation amongst Protestants; although in an incomplete way. . . (whatever that means)!

That claim, right there, falsifies the claim made by their own Vatican Council that there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. </font>[/QUOTE]I said "or I've read the catachism" for a specific reason

 

[Justified Saint]

That claim, right there, falsifies the claim made by their own Vatican Council that there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Singer, I think this has been explained to you enough times and you still choose not to understand.

 

[Gina B]

Originally posted by Brother Adam:


"That has been shown over and over by your refusal to accept the inspired word of God's teachings over the words of a "church"."

As do you Gina, ascribe your faith, beliefs, and practices to a Church- that is, the principals and teachings of the Baptist Church in America, who uses the scriptures to form doctrines.

In that you are completely wrong. I sought out the truth in the bible and then sought out a local group of Christians that did the same. I weeded through most in the area and found the one that seemed to follow the scriptures the closest. In the end the Baptist church was the one I joined. If I ever move again the search will be conducted in the same manner, but this time with the knowledge that a Baptist church is going to be the most likely place, so I'll put more focus on that denom when looking. (unless there's a few e-free churches in the area. )
Gina

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by thessalonian:

I recommend you leave the expounding on Catholic faith to us. You like to twist it to suit your agenda of hatred of the truth.

I really don't consider you the expert that you say you are. I know what experiences I have. I also have a copy of Vatican II documents, a copy of the Catechism, and some other sources, all of which say that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. Where would you like me to begin?
DHK

 

[Singer]

Originally posted by Justified Saint:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />That claim, right there, falsifies the claim made by their own Vatican Council that there is NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Singer, I think this has been explained to you enough times and you still choose not to understand. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes, I'm a little basic minded, J.S., so tell me one more time with a yes or a no.

Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?

Be careful, DHK has documents that make the claim there IS NOT!!

 

[Carson Weber]

Hi Gina,

You wrote, "It is an open board, for anyone to post on who is a member. That is NOT the same as being free to post whatever you feel like posting. There are rules and regulations."

I agree completely with you, and so the next logical question is "Which posting rule did my post violate?"

One of them is that you cannot post anything that tries to persuade others against Christianity. I saw your post, titled "Why should a Baptist become Catholic", as a direct violation of that rule.

So, Catholicism retained the very existence of the Scriptures and kept Christianity alive (from Barbarian and Turk) throughout the first 1500 years after Jesus ascended into heaven and then stopped being Christian once Martin Luther posted his 95 theses (which, btw, can all be defended as orthodox from a Catholic viewpoint)?

I suppose Augustine, Ignatius of Antioch, Ambrose, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Peter Chrysologus, John Chrysostom, Tertullian, Alexander of Alexandria, Clement of Rome, Dionysius, Gregory Nazianzen, Hippolytus, Hilary of Pontiers, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Jerome, John Damascene, Lactantius, Leo the Great, Polycarp, Vincent of Lerins, and Victorinus were all not Christians?

What next.. President Bush isn't American?

This is a baptist board, meant for baptists to post on. You are not a baptist. You and others were offered the privilege of joining with some forums restricted.

Thank you very much for this privilege and your Christian charity.

I missed the stipulation that I was not to share my interpretation of the Scriptures. Perhaps you should add a new posting rule: "You cannot privately interpret Scripture in any way that contradicts what the Baptist church teaches."

You took that offer and used it to try to promote your false religion upon the baptist members and sway them from their beliefs. That was very rude.

Let me get this straight. It is rude to share my faith (which Jesus commands me to do as his disciple) in a designated area created especially for non-Baptists to post in?

How can a Baptist see it as being rude to share Jesus Christ and the truths of the Bible with others (when the Baptist reveres Scripture as the Word of God and Jesus as Lord)?

To top it off, you bring your problem with it out in an open forum when it was being dealt with privately via pm.

Actually, the thread included many posts from various members of BaptistBoard. Rather than it being "my problem," it is a public issue. You removed the public thread from public as everyone can see.

Do you really think that everyone else is unaware of that particular thread's immediate and mysterious disappearance from the board?

I believe a very strong argument can be made that your censorship contradicts central tenets of the Baptist faith such as the common priesthood of the believer, the prerogative for private interpretation, the authority of Scripture, and the primacy of discipleship to Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is my personal Lord and Saviour; I trust in him daily for my eternal salvation, I pray to him, I rely in no wise upon my own merits, I seek to know him intimately. I am a priest of Jesus Christ by virtue of my being a Christian believer (I'm actually teaching this Sunday on the priesthood of the laity this upcoming Sunday to non-Catholics who want to learn more about Catholicism and are thinking about possibly becoming Catholic), and I have the ability to interpret Scripture for myself.

Is it really a Baptist distinctive to deny me my ability to do so?

[ February 11, 2004, 12:36 AM: Message edited by: Carson Weber ]

 

[Gina B]

Carson: You wrote, "It is an open board, for anyone to post on who is a member. That is NOT the same as being free to post whatever you feel like posting. There are rules and regulations."

I agree completely with you, and so the next logical question is "Which posting rule did my post violate?"

Gina: Read the next paragraph you typed for the answer. ROFL!

Carson: One of them is that you cannot post anything that tries to persuade others against Christianity. I saw your post, titled "Why should a Baptist become Catholic", as a direct violation of that rule.

So, Catholicism retained the very existence of the Scriptures and kept Christianity alive (from Barbarian and Turk) throughout the first 1500 years after Jesus ascended into heaven and then stopped being Christian once Martin Luther posted his 95 theses (which, btw, can all be defended as orthodox from a Catholic viewpoint)?

I suppose Augustine, Ignatius of Antioch, Ambrose, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Peter Chrysologus, John Chrysostom, Tertullian, Alexander of Alexandria, Clement of Rome, Dionysius, Gregory Nazianzen, Hippolytus, Hilary of Pontiers, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Jerome, John Damascene, Lactantius, Leo the Great, Polycarp, Vincent of Lerins, and Victorinus were all not Christians?

What next.. President Bush isn't American?

Gina: I'm beginning to have my doubts about Bush.
A number of people you tend to quote did not follow the Catholic church as it presents today. I really don't know much about them so I can't go into a detailed discussion on them. Not that it matters a fig. What DOES matter is what does the bible say, and does what we believe agree with it? I could care less what a bunch of dead guys who didn't write inspired scripture thought, it doesn't pertain to me and my God at this point in time.

Carson: This is a baptist board, meant for baptists to post on. You are not a baptist. You and others were offered the privilege of joining with some forums restricted.

Thank you very much for this privilege and your Christian charity.

Gina: Don't thank me, thank the Webmaster.

Carson: I missed the stipulation that I was not to share my interpretation of the Scriptures. Perhaps you should add a new posting rule: "You cannot privately interpret Scripture in any way that contradicts what the Baptist church teaches."

Gina: Let me try this in a more simple manner.
Catholic board set up to promote Catholicism: no
It doesn't need to be spelled out, it's common sense. You join a baptist board you jump on and promote the Catholic church and try to tell Baptists they should leave the Baptist church and become Catholic. Is that really such a hard concept of etiquette to grasp?


Carson: You took that offer and used it to try to promote your false religion upon the baptist members and sway them from their beliefs. That was very rude.

Let me get this straight. It is rude to share my faith (which Jesus commands me to do as his disciple) in a designated area created especially for non-Baptists to post in?

Gina: Yes, it is not only rude to share false beliefs, it's just wrong. Jesus commands you to share your faith in Jesus, not your faith in the Catholic church.
Yes, it is rude to join a baptist board and promote Catholocism. You were not discussing and debating issues, you were proseletyzing or however it's spelled. There is a difference.

Carson: How can a Baptist see it as being rude to share Jesus Christ and the truths of the Bible with others (when the Baptist reveres Scripture as the Word of God and Jesus as Lord)?

Gina: You are not sharing the truth of the bible. You are sharing the truth of the twisted Catholic version of the doctrines of the bible and some other garbage.

Carson: To top it off, you bring your problem with it out in an open forum when it was being dealt with privately via pm.

Actually, the thread included many posts from various members of BaptistBoard. Rather than it being "my problem," it is a public issue. You removed the public thread from public as everyone can see.

Do you really think that everyone else is unaware of that particular thread's immediate and mysterious disappearance from the board?

Gina: Nope, I don't believe they are unaware. I did note that not one of them threw a hissy fit though. The only one that did was the one I tried to privately send an explanation to. (that would be you) I came to the conclusion that
A. They figured out the mystery all on their own
B. They would ask where it went and I would explain.

Does that answer your questions or does this conversation need to continue?
Gina

 

[Gina B]

You edited while I was posting my reply, so I didn't catch your new addition.
Gina

 

[Justified Saint]

I thought non-Christians weren't allowed membership? Is this correct or has the rule on this changed?

 

[DHK]

The People of God: Chapter 2, Paragraph 14, pp. 32,33

This sacred Synod turns its attention first to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon sacred Scripture and tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile is necessary for salvation.* For Christ, made present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique Way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk.16:16; Jn.3:5) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church. Whoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her could not be saved.

*To indicate the importance of union with the Church, the Council first reiterates the traditional Catholic teaching on the necessity of the Church for salvation. This necessity is a double one arising both from the positive precept of Christ that men should enter the Church and from the efficacy of the Church’s means of grace (especially her proclamation of the faith and her administration of the sacrament of baptism) for the imparting and sustaining an authentically Christian life.
The Documents of Vatican II

 

[Gina B]

Originally posted by Justified Saint:
I thought non-Christians weren't allowed membership? Is this correct or has the rule on this changed?

That is a question you need to bring up to the Webmaster.
I cited openly to Carson my personal reason for removing his thread, for the sake of explaining.
It was based on my personal opinion as I had the right to do:

We reserve the right to delete any message, topic, to ban a username, IP address, domain name, or email address for *any reason* that we feel is deserved.

If I made a mistake according to Webmaster's wishes and policies I am sure he will let us know.
In the meantime, any further discussion on the removal of that thread will not be answered by me on THIS thread. If anyone feels it STILL has not been explained enough or that they do not understand the rules of this board feel free to pm the moderators or administrators with your concerns and comments.
Gina

 

[Justified Saint]

The People of God: Chapter 2, Paragraph 14, pp. 32,33

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sacred Synod turns its attention first to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon sacred Scripture and tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile is necessary for salvation.* For Christ, made present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique Way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk.16:16; Jn.3:5) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church. Whoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her could not be saved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*To indicate the importance of union with the Church, the Council first reiterates the traditional Catholic teaching on the necessity of the Church for salvation. This necessity is a double one arising both from the positive precept of Christ that men should enter the Church and from the efficacy of the Church’s means of grace (especially her proclamation of the faith and her administration of the sacrament of baptism) for the imparting and sustaining an authentically Christian life.
The Documents of Vatican II

Ah, the compounding errors of Catholicism. Not only does the Catholic Church teach error but it also believes that the error it teaches is true!

Yes, the Catholic Church believes that Christ founded one church, one gospel, one truth, not 30,000 churches, 30,000 gospels, and 30,000 truths.

 

[Justified Saint]

It was based on my personal opinion as I had the right to do

Gina, thank you for the clarification.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Justified Saint:
Ah, the compounding errors of Catholicism. Not only does the Catholic Church teach error but it also believes that the error it teaches is true!

Yes, the Catholic Church believes that Christ founded one church, one gospel, one truth, not 30,000 churches, 30,000 gospels, and 30,000 truths.

The Bible and the gospel which we believe has not changed. It is still found in 1Cor.15:1-4, just in case you don't know. I have documented what you, Adam, and other Catholics seem to deny--there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
Now for the nonsense that you just posted, either provide evidence as to its truthfulness or recant it. 30,000 indeed!!
DHK

 

[Singer]

1. "Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation. Vatican Council

2. NOW THE DENIAL STARTS !! Singer

3. Ah, the compounding errors of Catholicism. Not only does the Catholic Church teach error but it also believes that the error it teaches is true!
Mockery,denial, an attempt at humor to divert the question

by J.S.

4. My question again J.S. Is there salvation outside of the Catholic Church. Yes or No ??
Singer

[ February 11, 2004, 08:32 AM: Message edited by: Singer ]