Justified Saint
New Member
BTW, my name is J.S.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Catholic "Salvation"
- Thread starter Brother Adam
- Start date
Adam, if that's supposed to mean that our theologies are similar then with the same resulting salvation, does that make you wonder what the Catholic are promoting then?Originally posted by Brother Adam:
Well Singer, like me or not, you've undoubtly proven that you don't have a grip on the Catholic theology
That's what I mean about DENIAL.
When they're confronted on issues that stand out, they always try to conform to unity with the Protestants, and you're being their pawn.
Singer
Brother Adam
New Member
Adam, if that's supposed to mean that our theologies are similar then with the same resulting salvation, does that make you wonder what the Catholic are promoting then?Originally posted by Singer:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Brother Adam:
Well Singer, like me or not, you've undoubtly proven that you don't have a grip on the Catholic theology
That's what I mean about DENIAL.
When they're confronted on issues that stand out, they always try to conform to unity with the Protestants, and you're being their pawn.
Singer </font>[/QUOTE]I'm certianly not saying they are the same, and if I was their "pawn" they probably would lash out when I disagree wholeheartedly with them. Regardless, you aren't in the position to say that.
What I am saying is you have to remove yourself from your 20th century Protestant Reformed mindset to even begin to be able to understand where Catholics are coming from. They've got at least a 1000 year head start on the protestants, not to mention some of the greatest theological minds to ever walk the earth.
There are no doubt similiarities between Catholicism and the protestant off-shoot. You can literally develop a scale of Christianity that goes from High-Angelican to Mormonism and other cults with Baptist about in between.
Our similarities include a genuine love and faith in Jesus Christ as our Savior through the gift of God's grace. We do part though on what faith is and the application of that grace. Do Catholics affirm a "works based salvation"? Catholics affirm that good fruits are a necessary part of the Christian life. So yes, in that regard, they are a "works" based group.
Carson: 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.
Of course it matters. These individuals were the big names, the Bible preachers of the Early Church, individuals who translated the entire Bible by hand from manuscripts that no longer exist (for example, Jerome), individuals who have written more on Jesus, the Trinity, and Salvation from their prayerful time spent pouring over the Scriptures than you could care to read with the rest of the time available at your fingertips in your life.
Gina: Sorry, but it really and truly doesn't make any difference to me. That's great and wonderful if people leave us stuff to read, and if they were good people, but that's about the extent of it. Guess I'm just not much into being impressed by what you call "the big names".
Carson: And what does the Bible teach? Things that contradict your beliefs as a Baptist such as regenerative baptism:
Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 3:18-21
Gina: TIT 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
TIT 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Are you saying the washing of regeneration is baptism? Being regenerated occurs when our heart is changed toward God. That is an inward working of Christ in us. And pretty plain in that scripture, I might add.
1PET 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1PET 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
What do you believe is the like figure of the Noah being saved that is NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh Carson?
Carson: An authority composed of bishops:
Matthew 18:15-18
Gina: MT 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
I don't get it. Where's your bishops in these verses?
Peter and the disciples were given the authority and inspiration to build the church and declare it's laws. They did this.
Interesting that this is the same scriptures the mormons use to give binding authority to their group of apostles. Why do you believe that certain people today have this authority, and what makes it only right if it's in a Catholic church and given to a bishop?
Carson: Auricular confession:
John 20:21-23
Gina: JN 20:23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
Great, this will help you with your view of baptism. This is still Peter and the disciples, and their authority given to them to set up the church. They were able to speak through the Holy Spirit (as was BAPTIZED on them in extra measure, read the whole thing) and they spoke under the inspiration of it. What did they say as far as the remission and retainment of sins? Paraphrased, they said "the only way to be cleansed of your sins is faith, those without faith are those whose sins will be kept unto them unto death".
Carson: The loss of one's salvation:
1 Cor 10:12Carson: 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.
Of course it matters. These individuals were the big names, the Bible preachers of the Early Church, individuals who translated the entire Bible by hand from manuscripts that no longer exist (for example, Jerome), individuals who have written more on Jesus, the Trinity, and Salvation from their prayerful time spent pouring over the Scriptures than you could care to read with the rest of the time available at your fingertips in your life.
Gina: Sorry, but it really and truly doesn't make any difference to me. That's great and wonderful if people leave us stuff to read, and if they were good people, but that's about the extent of it. Guess I'm just not much into being impressed by what you call "the big names".
Carson: And what does the Bible teach? Things that contradict your beliefs as a Baptist such as regenerative baptism:
Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 3:18-21
Gina: TIT 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
TIT 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Are you saying the washing of regeneration is baptism? Being regenerated occurs when our heart is changed toward God. That is an inward working of Christ in us. And pretty plain in that scripture, I might add.
1PET 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1PET 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
What do you believe is the like figure of the Noah being saved that is NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh Carson?
Carson: An authority composed of bishops:
Matthew 18:15-18
Gina: MT 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
I don't get it. Where's your bishops in these verses?
Peter and the disciples were given the authority and inspiration to build the church and declare it's laws. They did this.
Interesting that this is the same scriptures the mormons use to give binding authority to their group of apostles. Why do you believe that certain people today have this authority, and what makes it only right if it's in a Catholic church and given to a bishop?
Carson: Auricular confession:
John 20:21-23
Gina: JN 20:23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
Great, this will help you with your view of baptism. This is still Peter and the disciples, and their authority given to them to set up the church. They were able to speak through the Holy Spirit (as was BAPTIZED on them in extra measure, read the whole thing) and they spoke under the inspiration of it. What did they say as far as the remission and retainment of sins? Paraphrased, they said "the only way to be cleansed of your sins is faith, those without faith are those whose sins will be kept unto them unto death".
Carson: The loss of one's salvation:
1 Cor 10:12
Gina: 1COR 10:12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
And? How is this talking about one's salvation? Most people stumble when they think they're safe and let their guard down against sin/temptation to sin. It doesn't mean they automatically are now headed for hell because of it. Yikes!
Carson: That Jesus' flesh is food indeed:
John 6:55
Gina:JN 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
JN 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
JN 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
JN 6:58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
And from this you think Jesus wants us to literally eat him? ROFL! Have you considered he may have meant this as a spiritual parallel? He is called the bread of life (our spiritual life, we will have eternally life spiritually, we know it's not physical, and those that thirst may come to them when they are spiritually dry that they may be refreshed)
No Carson, taking a bite out of Jesus physically is a bit irrational. Jesus in your heart, not your belly.
Carson: That we are to adhere to Apostolic Tradition:
2 Thess 2:15
Gina: What is apostolic tradition?
Carson: That the Church is visibly one:
John 17:21
Gina: JN 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
This verse is clearly talking about the unity of believers. Being of one accord, one faith, one mission.
Carson: and on many other points.
Gina: like what? Apart from that, I'm glad you're pointing out the differences between Baptists and Catholics and just how much doctrine is disagreed upon. It kinda negates your previous statements that we are basically on the same page, but our cups are just a bit less full than the Catholics cups. Right?
Carson: You can say that you are a "Bible Christian," but when the Bible test is applied, you clash with as much of the Bible as you claim Catholics do. When others point this out, you become uneasy, and rightly so. I would certainly be uneasy if my faith was unBiblical.
Gina: I do become uneasy if I don't understand why there's a clash. That's where studying and reading MORE of the bible teamed up with prayer and a request for guidance from the Holy Spirit come in. And your point? I'd hope you and others would become uneasy too if you found something in your beliefs that clash with the bible. It's a good thing to be uneasy sometimes Carson, it helps us grow and learn and reminds us we're human.
Carson: 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.
Then you don't have a Bible.
Gina: Yep, I do. It was written by a bunch of dead guys under INSPIRATION. Inspiration, non-inspiration.
Inspired works.
Uninspired works.
See the difference?
Carson:In 324 A.D., the Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea wrote:
"One epistle of Peter, that called the first, is acknowledged as genuine. And this the ancient elders used freely in their own writings as an undisputed work. But we have learned that his extant second Epistle does not belong to the canon . . . Among the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many, are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude, also the second epistle of Peter, and those that are called the second and third of John, whether they belong to the evangelist or to another person of the same name" (History of the Church, 3:3:1, 3:25:3).
Did you hear that? 2 Peter isn't inspired. This was the consensus in Eusebius' day in the circles he was familiar with, which were wide and far.
Why is 2 Peter in your Bible if you "could care less what a bunch of dead guys who didn't write inspired scripture thought"?
Who put that in there for you? Peter?
St. Thomas the apostle didn't write any Scripture; do you care what he thought?
St. Timothy didn't write any Scripture, yet he was ordained by St. Paul and was commanded to teach others who could faithfully teach others what Paul had taught him (2 Tim 2:2). Paul didn't say, "Keep this letter I'm writing to you safe because it's inspired Scripture. Copy it as many times as you can and distribute it far and wide because that is how Jesus planned his Church out to work."
Gina: I have no clue who Eusubias is.
We were talking about books, what was written. I said I didn't care what a bunch of dead guys wrote, and it was obvious that I meant as pertains to doctrine. I have enough to study with the bible. Some things may make interesting reads, reading about their lives may be interesting, but we cannot use them as sources of biblical doctrine.
Carson: 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?
It reminds me of Paul who went into the synagogue & preached Christ crucified. It made the Jews pretty upset to hear Paul argue from the Scriptures in a way that differed from their own interpretation. In fact, the Thessalonian Jews scorned Paul, whereas the Bereans had open hearts and minds and were praised as such.
Gina: Going onto a tiny corner of cyberspace called the baptist board and promoting Catholocism is like Paul preaching to the Jews? Otay. Take another bite of Jesus, you're fading.
Carson: Gina, be a Berean. Open your mind to the Scriptures and interpretations apart from your own fallible human interpretation.
Gina: If there was an infallible person on earth I would be open to listen to what he had to say. THERE ISN'T. My mind is open to the bible and shut to people and ideas that contradict it.
Carson: Unless, of course, you think you have an infallible guide that can lead you through the Bible and provide you with certainty that is infallible with regard to interpretation.
Gina: The only infallible guide I have is the Holy Spirit. I follow his guidance, and those he sends to help me learn how to follow him, like older Christians.
Carson: Yes, it is not only rude to share false beliefs, it's just wrong.
But, that presupposes that the beliefs are false to begin with. You see, you have already laid a preemptive strike at learning and accepting the truth of God's Word by closing yourself off to dialogue.
Gina: This is me, dialoguing, but not with the intention of learning and accepting Catholic teachings. Understanding them, maybe, but there's really no point in me really getting into something I have already checked into far enough to know I could never agree with enough to have a clear conscience.
Carson: In doing so, you nullify the Word of God by confining yourself to your own interpretation, which you must admit can certainly be fallible. If your personal interpretation is wrong on various points, and if you aren't open to edification, then you have thereby nullified the Word of God, not allowing it to say to you what it is supposed to say.
Gina: Nope. There's nothing wrong with figuring out the statements in the bible and then sticking to them. After a while you learn to quit running and sniffing every wind of doctrine blowing around, because eventually it always keeps coming back to the truth and then you learn to quit testing what's already been shown to you over and over to be truth.
CarsonL Jesus commands you to share your faith in Jesus, not your faith in the Catholic church.
Scripture tells us that the Church is the Body of Christ. Read Acts 9:4; 22:7; 26:14.
Jesus tells us that he will build his Church, which is in Scripture (Matthew 16:16-20), a part of the Gospel. If the Church isn't a part of the Gospel, then why is it in the Gospels?
Gina: No Carson, we are told to teach of Jesus and what he did on the cross, not to go and teach of our church denomination.
Carson: I should repent from the task of evangelization? Of preaching the good news of Jesus Christ and his Body?
Gina: Yes, you should repent from the task of evangelizing for the Catholic church instead of Christ. For not preaching the good news of Jesus Christ and his gift on the cross, and for taking one denomination and declaring that those under this name are more worthy because they are under the Catholic name.
Caron: That is for you to demonstrate. You see, Gina, you are just as fallible as I am, and you could very well be sharing the truth of the twisted Gina version of the doctrines of the bible and some other garbage.
Gina: If you want a demonstration go read the bible and the bible alone. Don't read me, don't ask other people. Read, pray, and study the bible alone, asking for guidance from the Holy Spirit as you do so.
Carson: You are prohibiting me from privately interpreting Scripture. You are prohibiting me from exercising my priestly function as a priest of Jesus Christ.
Gina: Get a grip Carson. I prohibited you from attempting to sway Baptists to Catholocism on one thread out of an ungodly number of posts doing the same by you. Paul would have gotten over it by now.
Carson: Your actions usurp the Baptist belief in the private interpretation of Scripture.
Gina: Where did you find that bit of wisdom? The bible says that nothing is of private interpretation. This is one of the reasons many of us see the Catholic church as false.
Carson: A question pertaining to the logic of a situation is far from a hissy fit, which is an emotative term in response to my substantial point that your actions are duplicitous.
Gina: Exactly. "A" question. 50 in repetition along with an assumption that your God-given rights have been trampled to a bloody pulp IS a hissy fit.
And don't use words like duplicitous unless you're talking to Dr. Bob. LOL
Carson: First, you write, "I don't like it when people disagree with me either, but this is an open forum, and here I am!" and then you demonstrate just how closed the forum really is in word and action.
Gina: See? Still dragging on about the same thread.
Carson: My exhortation is for you to be consistent in word and action. If this moral exhortation causes a stir in you, I would suggest searching your heart instead of attacking the messenger.
Gina: Don't worry, no stirring. I'm too used to the mormons and Jehovah's witness sayng the same thing whenever they get upset that I'm not agreeing with them.
Of course it matters. These individuals were the big names, the Bible preachers of the Early Church, individuals who translated the entire Bible by hand from manuscripts that no longer exist (for example, Jerome), individuals who have written more on Jesus, the Trinity, and Salvation from their prayerful time spent pouring over the Scriptures than you could care to read with the rest of the time available at your fingertips in your life.
Gina: Sorry, but it really and truly doesn't make any difference to me. That's great and wonderful if people leave us stuff to read, and if they were good people, but that's about the extent of it. Guess I'm just not much into being impressed by what you call "the big names".
Carson: And what does the Bible teach? Things that contradict your beliefs as a Baptist such as regenerative baptism:
Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 3:18-21
Gina: TIT 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
TIT 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Are you saying the washing of regeneration is baptism? Being regenerated occurs when our heart is changed toward God. That is an inward working of Christ in us. And pretty plain in that scripture, I might add.
1PET 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1PET 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
What do you believe is the like figure of the Noah being saved that is NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh Carson?
Carson: An authority composed of bishops:
Matthew 18:15-18
Gina: MT 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
I don't get it. Where's your bishops in these verses?
Peter and the disciples were given the authority and inspiration to build the church and declare it's laws. They did this.
Interesting that this is the same scriptures the mormons use to give binding authority to their group of apostles. Why do you believe that certain people today have this authority, and what makes it only right if it's in a Catholic church and given to a bishop?
Carson: Auricular confession:
John 20:21-23
Gina: JN 20:23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
Great, this will help you with your view of baptism. This is still Peter and the disciples, and their authority given to them to set up the church. They were able to speak through the Holy Spirit (as was BAPTIZED on them in extra measure, read the whole thing) and they spoke under the inspiration of it. What did they say as far as the remission and retainment of sins? Paraphrased, they said "the only way to be cleansed of your sins is faith, those without faith are those whose sins will be kept unto them unto death".
Carson: The loss of one's salvation:
1 Cor 10:12Carson: 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.
Of course it matters. These individuals were the big names, the Bible preachers of the Early Church, individuals who translated the entire Bible by hand from manuscripts that no longer exist (for example, Jerome), individuals who have written more on Jesus, the Trinity, and Salvation from their prayerful time spent pouring over the Scriptures than you could care to read with the rest of the time available at your fingertips in your life.
Gina: Sorry, but it really and truly doesn't make any difference to me. That's great and wonderful if people leave us stuff to read, and if they were good people, but that's about the extent of it. Guess I'm just not much into being impressed by what you call "the big names".
Carson: And what does the Bible teach? Things that contradict your beliefs as a Baptist such as regenerative baptism:
Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 3:18-21
Gina: TIT 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
TIT 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Are you saying the washing of regeneration is baptism? Being regenerated occurs when our heart is changed toward God. That is an inward working of Christ in us. And pretty plain in that scripture, I might add.
1PET 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1PET 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
What do you believe is the like figure of the Noah being saved that is NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh Carson?
Carson: An authority composed of bishops:
Matthew 18:15-18
Gina: MT 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
I don't get it. Where's your bishops in these verses?
Peter and the disciples were given the authority and inspiration to build the church and declare it's laws. They did this.
Interesting that this is the same scriptures the mormons use to give binding authority to their group of apostles. Why do you believe that certain people today have this authority, and what makes it only right if it's in a Catholic church and given to a bishop?
Carson: Auricular confession:
John 20:21-23
Gina: JN 20:23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
Great, this will help you with your view of baptism. This is still Peter and the disciples, and their authority given to them to set up the church. They were able to speak through the Holy Spirit (as was BAPTIZED on them in extra measure, read the whole thing) and they spoke under the inspiration of it. What did they say as far as the remission and retainment of sins? Paraphrased, they said "the only way to be cleansed of your sins is faith, those without faith are those whose sins will be kept unto them unto death".
Carson: The loss of one's salvation:
1 Cor 10:12
Gina: 1COR 10:12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
And? How is this talking about one's salvation? Most people stumble when they think they're safe and let their guard down against sin/temptation to sin. It doesn't mean they automatically are now headed for hell because of it. Yikes!
Carson: That Jesus' flesh is food indeed:
John 6:55
Gina:JN 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
JN 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
JN 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
JN 6:58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
And from this you think Jesus wants us to literally eat him? ROFL! Have you considered he may have meant this as a spiritual parallel? He is called the bread of life (our spiritual life, we will have eternally life spiritually, we know it's not physical, and those that thirst may come to them when they are spiritually dry that they may be refreshed)
No Carson, taking a bite out of Jesus physically is a bit irrational. Jesus in your heart, not your belly.
Carson: That we are to adhere to Apostolic Tradition:
2 Thess 2:15
Gina: What is apostolic tradition?
Carson: That the Church is visibly one:
John 17:21
Gina: JN 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
This verse is clearly talking about the unity of believers. Being of one accord, one faith, one mission.
Carson: and on many other points.
Gina: like what? Apart from that, I'm glad you're pointing out the differences between Baptists and Catholics and just how much doctrine is disagreed upon. It kinda negates your previous statements that we are basically on the same page, but our cups are just a bit less full than the Catholics cups. Right?
Carson: You can say that you are a "Bible Christian," but when the Bible test is applied, you clash with as much of the Bible as you claim Catholics do. When others point this out, you become uneasy, and rightly so. I would certainly be uneasy if my faith was unBiblical.
Gina: I do become uneasy if I don't understand why there's a clash. That's where studying and reading MORE of the bible teamed up with prayer and a request for guidance from the Holy Spirit come in. And your point? I'd hope you and others would become uneasy too if you found something in your beliefs that clash with the bible. It's a good thing to be uneasy sometimes Carson, it helps us grow and learn and reminds us we're human.
Carson: 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.
Then you don't have a Bible.
Gina: Yep, I do. It was written by a bunch of dead guys under INSPIRATION. Inspiration, non-inspiration.
Inspired works.
Uninspired works.
See the difference?
Carson:In 324 A.D., the Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea wrote:
"One epistle of Peter, that called the first, is acknowledged as genuine. And this the ancient elders used freely in their own writings as an undisputed work. But we have learned that his extant second Epistle does not belong to the canon . . . Among the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many, are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude, also the second epistle of Peter, and those that are called the second and third of John, whether they belong to the evangelist or to another person of the same name" (History of the Church, 3:3:1, 3:25:3).
Did you hear that? 2 Peter isn't inspired. This was the consensus in Eusebius' day in the circles he was familiar with, which were wide and far.
Why is 2 Peter in your Bible if you "could care less what a bunch of dead guys who didn't write inspired scripture thought"?
Who put that in there for you? Peter?
St. Thomas the apostle didn't write any Scripture; do you care what he thought?
St. Timothy didn't write any Scripture, yet he was ordained by St. Paul and was commanded to teach others who could faithfully teach others what Paul had taught him (2 Tim 2:2). Paul didn't say, "Keep this letter I'm writing to you safe because it's inspired Scripture. Copy it as many times as you can and distribute it far and wide because that is how Jesus planned his Church out to work."
Gina: I have no clue who Eusubias is.
We were talking about books, what was written. I said I didn't care what a bunch of dead guys wrote, and it was obvious that I meant as pertains to doctrine. I have enough to study with the bible. Some things may make interesting reads, reading about their lives may be interesting, but we cannot use them as sources of biblical doctrine.
Carson: 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?
It reminds me of Paul who went into the synagogue & preached Christ crucified. It made the Jews pretty upset to hear Paul argue from the Scriptures in a way that differed from their own interpretation. In fact, the Thessalonian Jews scorned Paul, whereas the Bereans had open hearts and minds and were praised as such.
Gina: Going onto a tiny corner of cyberspace called the baptist board and promoting Catholocism is like Paul preaching to the Jews? Otay. Take another bite of Jesus, you're fading.
Carson: Gina, be a Berean. Open your mind to the Scriptures and interpretations apart from your own fallible human interpretation.
Gina: If there was an infallible person on earth I would be open to listen to what he had to say. THERE ISN'T. My mind is open to the bible and shut to people and ideas that contradict it.
Carson: Unless, of course, you think you have an infallible guide that can lead you through the Bible and provide you with certainty that is infallible with regard to interpretation.
Gina: The only infallible guide I have is the Holy Spirit. I follow his guidance, and those he sends to help me learn how to follow him, like older Christians.
Carson: Yes, it is not only rude to share false beliefs, it's just wrong.
But, that presupposes that the beliefs are false to begin with. You see, you have already laid a preemptive strike at learning and accepting the truth of God's Word by closing yourself off to dialogue.
Gina: This is me, dialoguing, but not with the intention of learning and accepting Catholic teachings. Understanding them, maybe, but there's really no point in me really getting into something I have already checked into far enough to know I could never agree with enough to have a clear conscience.
Carson: In doing so, you nullify the Word of God by confining yourself to your own interpretation, which you must admit can certainly be fallible. If your personal interpretation is wrong on various points, and if you aren't open to edification, then you have thereby nullified the Word of God, not allowing it to say to you what it is supposed to say.
Gina: Nope. There's nothing wrong with figuring out the statements in the bible and then sticking to them. After a while you learn to quit running and sniffing every wind of doctrine blowing around, because eventually it always keeps coming back to the truth and then you learn to quit testing what's already been shown to you over and over to be truth.
CarsonL Jesus commands you to share your faith in Jesus, not your faith in the Catholic church.
Scripture tells us that the Church is the Body of Christ. Read Acts 9:4; 22:7; 26:14.
Jesus tells us that he will build his Church, which is in Scripture (Matthew 16:16-20), a part of the Gospel. If the Church isn't a part of the Gospel, then why is it in the Gospels?
Gina: No Carson, we are told to teach of Jesus and what he did on the cross, not to go and teach of our church denomination.
Carson: I should repent from the task of evangelization? Of preaching the good news of Jesus Christ and his Body?
Gina: Yes, you should repent from the task of evangelizing for the Catholic church instead of Christ. For not preaching the good news of Jesus Christ and his gift on the cross, and for taking one denomination and declaring that those under this name are more worthy because they are under the Catholic name.
Caron: That is for you to demonstrate. You see, Gina, you are just as fallible as I am, and you could very well be sharing the truth of the twisted Gina version of the doctrines of the bible and some other garbage.
Gina: If you want a demonstration go read the bible and the bible alone. Don't read me, don't ask other people. Read, pray, and study the bible alone, asking for guidance from the Holy Spirit as you do so.
Carson: You are prohibiting me from privately interpreting Scripture. You are prohibiting me from exercising my priestly function as a priest of Jesus Christ.
Gina: Get a grip Carson. I prohibited you from attempting to sway Baptists to Catholocism on one thread out of an ungodly number of posts doing the same by you. Paul would have gotten over it by now.
Carson: Your actions usurp the Baptist belief in the private interpretation of Scripture.
Gina: Where did you find that bit of wisdom? The bible says that nothing is of private interpretation. This is one of the reasons many of us see the Catholic church as false.
Carson: A question pertaining to the logic of a situation is far from a hissy fit, which is an emotative term in response to my substantial point that your actions are duplicitous.
Gina: Exactly. "A" question. 50 in repetition along with an assumption that your God-given rights have been trampled to a bloody pulp IS a hissy fit.
And don't use words like duplicitous unless you're talking to Dr. Bob. LOL
Carson: First, you write, "I don't like it when people disagree with me either, but this is an open forum, and here I am!" and then you demonstrate just how closed the forum really is in word and action.
Gina: See? Still dragging on about the same thread.
Carson: My exhortation is for you to be consistent in word and action. If this moral exhortation causes a stir in you, I would suggest searching your heart instead of attacking the messenger.
Gina: Don't worry, no stirring. I'm too used to the mormons and Jehovah's witness sayng the same thing whenever they get upset that I'm not agreeing with them.
Justified Saint
New Member
Singer, I answered your question; isn't it the Christian thing to do to answer mine?
Yes it is J.S.; I was busy entertaining my Mormonborn Son in Law and our grandchildren.
I'll catch up with Adam here a little where he quipped:
Singer
I'll catch up with Adam here a little where he quipped:
Adam, don 't forget that faith did not originate with either the Catholics or Protestants. Be it known that Salvation by Faith had a 4,000 year lead on Catholicism.
Singer
D
dumbox1
Guest
Singer wrote:
"Lumen Gentium" is the Second Vatican Council's document discussing such matters. It's quite true that "any moron" can read it. It also appears that you have not, since it seems you haven't even heard its name.
Maybe you should.
Mark
Dear Singer,
"Lumen Gentium" is the Second Vatican Council's document discussing such matters. It's quite true that "any moron" can read it. It also appears that you have not, since it seems you haven't even heard its name.
Maybe you should.
Mark
Dear Singer,
"Lumen Gentium" is the Second Vatican Council's document discussing such matters. It's quite true that "any moron" can read it. It also appears that you have not, since it seems you haven't even heard its name.
Maybe you should.
Mark </font>[/QUOTE]No, Mark, I haven't read it, but it seems that it must be another denial of the statement that salvation is not possible outside the Catholic Church. Otherwise, why would you want me to read it...? Also, the bible as God's inspired word is sufficient to lead unto salvation; why would I want to read a document that probably denies the brunt of another topic (salvation) that was produced by an entity that I don't believe in anyhow?
GraceSaves
New Member
Singer,
Wow, you deny what it says without reading it or caring to read it, becasue its not an important issue to you, and yet you keep talking about it.
Such a conundrum.
Wow, you deny what it says without reading it or caring to read it, becasue its not an important issue to you, and yet you keep talking about it.
Such a conundrum.
J.S., you Catholics have milk on your faces. When pressured about your beliefs, you always attempt to verify that they are the same beliefs that Protestants have. Do you realize that is so obvious? Because this is the case, I fail to understand what it is [you think] that Protestants lack. You even say Protestants are connected to the Catholic Church in an imperfect way and that you accept them as brothers in Christ. The Vatican, as you quoted, believes that the faith of those not connected to the Catholic Church also Saves . That flies in the face of their own statement that says there is "No salvation outside of the Catholic Church". That's doublespeak, J.S. You rectify that by saying that I am an imperfectly united Catholic, which is your reasoning to call me on the rug when I dispute Catholic claims of exclusivity.
Hey, I'm not even baptized and I reject your (and the Vatican's) inclusion in your "Imperfect brotherhood". My sainthood as a believer of the work of Christ on the cross is sufficient to gain me salvation. So what's the big deal with the Catholic Church anyhow?
God was handing out diplomas of salvation long before the Catholic Church took a name and long before Peter was supposedly appointed pope.
I'll include your question here once again:
Sure, this is an attack on your claims of Catholic Superiority. To answer whether I believe there is salvation outside the "Church Christ founded", ........first I'd have to believe there was a church that Jesus Christ founded that had either the name of Catholic, Mormon, 2x2 etc.
You know my answer to that. I left the 2x2 sect of my birthright for the same reasons that I reject yours. Neither of you have a franchise on salvation.
The issue of salvation can be settled by reading 1 John 5:11,12. Print that out for me on this thread, J.S. and comment on it if you will.
Thank You,
Singer
Born Again Catholic
New Member
Gina
All of us have different gifts maybe you are just not cut out to be a moderator of this type of forum or maybe you just need to change your approach.
Clint for example wrote "I tend to be rather light handed and often lurk only in the shadows. If I were too heavy handed, the forum would lose its purpose." Maybe you should ask him what he meant by that
We can all disagree in a charitable way. As a moderator you have more responsibility than the average member. When a moderator sets a tone that is uncharitable I have noticed in the past that it greatly effects the overall peacefullness of this section of the board.
God Bless
All of us have different gifts maybe you are just not cut out to be a moderator of this type of forum or maybe you just need to change your approach.
Clint for example wrote "I tend to be rather light handed and often lurk only in the shadows. If I were too heavy handed, the forum would lose its purpose." Maybe you should ask him what he meant by that
We can all disagree in a charitable way. As a moderator you have more responsibility than the average member. When a moderator sets a tone that is uncharitable I have noticed in the past that it greatly effects the overall peacefullness of this section of the board.
God Bless
P.S.
Hey J.S., please don't poop out on me now and let one of your counterparts take over the conversation. That seems to be a tactic of you guys; (When the going gets tough; fake a headache and let someone else take over). It must also be part of your training as a Protestant Chaser. No Catholic has ever denied that you've been instructed in internet forum debating.
Singer
Hey J.S., please don't poop out on me now and let one of your counterparts take over the conversation. That seems to be a tactic of you guys; (When the going gets tough; fake a headache and let someone else take over). It must also be part of your training as a Protestant Chaser. No Catholic has ever denied that you've been instructed in internet forum debating.
Singer
Justified Saint
New Member
Great way to start off Singer. You must not have been sure what to say so this is the first thing that came to mind.
No, I am simply identifying the double standard.
It turns out then that you are the one in denial. You want so bad for Vatican II to say something that it doesn't but it simply isn't there. "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian ...", Remember to read and comprehend Singer, you have to have both going for you. Perhaps the question didn't resonate, is there salvation outside Christ's Church.
So, is it your admission then that Christ founded no Church whether physical or spiritual? Certainly such an admission would contradict earlier statements made by you.
Jesus Christ is our saviour thank you very much.
Justified Saint
New Member
I'll just try to ignore that you said this.
P.S. It seems like when the going gets tough for you guys you rely on ad hominem attacks.
Ok, so your resolution is that there is NO difference between Catholics and Protestants then (as far as salvation is concerned).
That's a reasonable assumption.
This might shock you to know that not all Catholics feel there is such unity between Protestant / Catholic and that there is salvation outside the Catholic Church.
Look at this conversation with Carson Weber:
(Question)
You asked, "How about if you reject the Catholic Church; are you still
saved?"
(Carson's Answer)
No, I would not be saved then because such a
rejection would be a grave sin. I would be
rejecting the family of God, which is essentially, what I am saved for. We are saved from sin and we are saved for inclusion into God's covenant family.
(Carson Weber on Baptist Board thread(Why are Most Jehovah's Witnesses Former Catholic)
thread July 2, 03
SOMETHING STINKS, J.C.
Dont think that he had a denomination in mind when he spoke of church. Consider Acts 2:47
"Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved."
How could he have added to the Catholic Church when it didn't even exist yet for another 400 years....and don't give me that "Forerunner of the Catholic Church" pitch. There was a church already established when those 3,000 were added and it sure wasn't the Catholic Church.
( I said)
The issue of salvation can be settled by reading 1 John 5:11,12. Print that out for me on this thread, J.S. and comment on it if you will.
You afraid of looking at that scripture, J.S.?
He's my savior as well and putting out claims that there is no salvation outside of Catholicism and then trying to deny that's what it says and seeing statements like the one above made by Carson Weber doesn't do your cause any good, and I'm glad to expose you in this way.
Yes, you can discount me as irrational and close-minded and using personal attacks against you if you like, but if you're expecting your affiliation with Catholicism to gain you any favor in heaven, you're badly mistaken.
Singer
Along with Carson's own evidence, and the quote I previously gave from Vatican II documents, it is enough to demonstrate that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. This the position of the Catholic Church, always has been historically, and she has no intention of ever changing it.
There are many ex-Catholics on this board such as myself. Carson just described our fate. His exact words: I would not be saved. The only conclusion that we can come from such a statement as that is that I and those in similar situations are not saved, according to he and the Catholic Church. We are not saved on two accounts: We have once been in the Catholic Church and have rejected it, and secondly, simply because all who are not in it cannot be saved.
DHK
I'm quite positive that the forum's purpose is not for Catholics to evangelize for the Catholic church.
There is a difference between debate and evangelizing for the Catholic church. Carson's post crossed that line.
It would indeed be much more peaceful to not call people out on this, or to be more mealy-mouthed when calling false doctrine false.
It's one topic I chose not to "lurk in the shadows" on.
I edited ONE thread that was an obvious attempt on a Baptist Board to draw Baptists away from the Baptist church. No, that is NOT the purpose of this forum, and I wouldn't call it heavy handed to edit one post and request it not be done.
The request has NOT been honored. Not only that, this topic was asked to be settled via pm by anyone that still had questions, and even that simple request is not being followed.
You may have a point as to the tone of my posts. It is a major struggle for me on a daily basis to show more charity towards others. If you only knew what I WANTED to say!
But...thanks for the reminder, your polite way of saying it, and it's something I will try harder with. Gina
GraceSaves
New Member
DHK,
Your "two accounts" that you are not saved. Carson demonstrated the first one, and then you just threw the second one in, as if he insinuated it. That is not the case, and your second argument is false.
Your first "account" may also be false, because I have rarely seen that you have any idea what the Church teaches. You disagree with things that the Church does not teach; you attribute things to her falsely. Of course, after you are corrected, and you continue to do it, you are simply guilty of false witness or willful ignorance, both of which are sinful and which you show no remorse for.
Gina,
You deleted one of my threads. I asked why. You said you'd check on it. I know you read my second reply. You never responded. That doesn't sound like you are dealing with it in the PMs.
Oh, and just in case some of you have doubts otherwise, Clint says: "All participants in this forum are Christian, though we hail from a variety of denominations." Oh goodness, he has gone and done it. He called Catholics "Christians!" Whodathunkit.
Your "two accounts" that you are not saved. Carson demonstrated the first one, and then you just threw the second one in, as if he insinuated it. That is not the case, and your second argument is false.
Your first "account" may also be false, because I have rarely seen that you have any idea what the Church teaches. You disagree with things that the Church does not teach; you attribute things to her falsely. Of course, after you are corrected, and you continue to do it, you are simply guilty of false witness or willful ignorance, both of which are sinful and which you show no remorse for.
Gina,
You deleted one of my threads. I asked why. You said you'd check on it. I know you read my second reply. You never responded. That doesn't sound like you are dealing with it in the PMs.
Oh, and just in case some of you have doubts otherwise, Clint says: "All participants in this forum are Christian, though we hail from a variety of denominations." Oh goodness, he has gone and done it. He called Catholics "Christians!" Whodathunkit.