Protestant disinfo debunked-Catholics are also Christians

Originally posted by Snsoc

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by adjensen

 

It is time for me to bring this discussion to an end.

The Bible is clear. Repentance, baptism, and receiving the Holy Spirit are faith actions and are necessary for salvation.

If you want to ignore what Peter said to do in response to the question, "what shall we do?" After He preached the Gospel, go ahead, but rejecting the teaching of the apostles does not make you Apostolic, Christian, or saved. It leaves you in a faithless counterfeit religion with no salvation.

You're not bringing anything to an end. This is my thread, and I'll decide when it ends, unless the mods close it, which could very well happen, since people want to get hot and heavy over a little bit of water. No wonder people don't want to get saved and join a church.

edit on 16-4-2013 by Snsoc because: (no reason given)

I think you misunderstood me. I meant my discussion, not your thread.

I can bring my discussion to an end and leave your thread any time I like. I am not your puppet.

reply to post by Snsoc

Dear Snsoc,

I've never said this before, but this is an unusual thread. I'm glad that there has been so much participation, but please allow me to be honest and blunt.

Are we going around in circles on Infant Baptism? You had so much you wanted to discuss. It appears that, unless we make this a hundred-page thread we'll never get to it all. So, here's the part I've never said before:

Is there anything I can do to help you accomplish what you wanted to with this thread?

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by truejew


Ah. Forgive me brother, I did misunderstand.

I think we can declare infant baptism a closed point, at least for this discussion. Agreed?

reply to post by charles1952


Perhaps I raised too many points-this should have been 8 threads instead of the one. I don't think there's anything wrong with making it a 100-page thread, so long as it is instructive, civil, and relevant.

Maybe we can re-post the other 7 points individually and tackle them one at a time?

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Dear NOTurTypical,

There isn't any verses that state that the Bible is the only source or authority. Andagain, sola scriptura isn't a doctrine, it's just an approach to the Christian life.

If there is no Biblical reason to reject Apostolic Authority, and several reasons to accept it (although they might not convince everyone), why not accept the authority of Tradition?

You've explained that you don't accept things like Infant Baptism, but now, I can't see why. There's Tradition for it, nothing Biblical against it, I'm left totally confused.

I can't explain my feeling well in words, but let me try. You are intelligent. You've thought about this subject. You can express yourself with above average clarity. And with all of that, I don't understand your conclusions. It's not that I don't accept them, that's one thing. I don't even understand them. 99 times out of 100, that means I'm missing something important, and I don't want to.

Thank you for all the work you've put in.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by Snsoc

Dear Snsoc,

I'm perfectly willing to follow along. It remains to be seen whether others think it's time for the switch. I believe the next topic on your list is "Confession." If it's not premature, I suppose I should post part of the Church's teaching on it.

1440 Sin is before all else an offense against God, a rupture of communion with him. At the same time it damages communion with the Church. For this reason conversion entails both God's forgiveness and reconciliation with the Church, which are expressed and accomplished liturgically by the sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation.

Only God forgives sin

1441 Only God forgives sins. Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, "The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins" and exercises this divine power: "Your sins are forgiven." Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name.

1442 Christ has willed that in her prayer and life and action his whole Church should be the sign and instrument of the forgiveness and reconciliation that he acquired for us at the price of his blood. But he entrusted the exercise of the power of absolution to the apostolic ministry which he charged with the "ministry of reconciliation." The apostle is sent out "on behalf of Christ" with "God making his appeal" through him and pleading: "Be reconciled to God."

Reconciliation with the Church

1443 During his public life Jesus not only forgave sins, but also made plain the effect of this forgiveness: he reintegrated forgiven sinners into the community of the People of God from which sin had alienated or even excluded them. A remarkable sign of this is the fact that Jesus receives sinners at his table, a gesture that expresses in an astonishing way both God's forgiveness and the return to the bosom of the People of God.

1444 In imparting to his apostles his own power to forgive sins the Lord also gives them the authority to reconcile sinners with the Church. This ecclesial dimension of their task is expressed most notably in Christ's solemn words to Simon Peter: "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." "The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of the apostles united to its head."

1445 The words bind and loose mean: whomever you exclude from your communion, will be excluded from communion with God; whomever you receive anew into your communion, God will welcome back into his. Reconciliation with the Church is inseparable from reconciliation with God. (Footnotes deleted, topic headings emphasied)

www.vatican.va...

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Charles1952,

Thank you for this. It makes clear that confessing ones sins to our fellow believers is required. One question: some Protestant churches have "accountability" circles, where Christians confess their sins to each other. Would this be "just as good" in your opinion, or does it require the Apostolic authority?

reply to post by Snsoc


Confessing sin to one a priest instills within the
person confessing both humility and accountability.

To confess in a group is asking a lot.

reply to post by adjensen

There is a basic tension between Catholic and Protestant theologies, regarding works, but neither believes that God is handcuffed by our works, which is what the theology that "truejew" espouses -- God cannot save you unless you do a specific work, in a specific fashion, meaning that God is limited by your actions. As NuT says, it is a form of Christian witchcraft.

Ahh.
I think I see it now. Thank you.

I was baptized as an infant (Episcopal church), then taught progressively until I was old enough to be 'confirmed.'
I went through weeks and weeks of lessons and we had to pass a test (oral exam, I think it was, but it's a faded memory).
AFTER THAT, we were officially "accepted" into the bosom of the church and allowed Communion. Before confirmation, we went up to the rail, but crossed our arms over our hearts, with our hands touching the opposite shoulder, and received the priest's blessing, but not the sacrament. We had to be confirmed before getting the sacrament. I think that's fairly close to RCC procedure, isn't it?

reply to post by wildtimes

I think that's fairly close to RCC procedure, isn't it?

Yes, that's exactly the same procedure -- the Episcopal Church is the American branch of the Church of England, and that delineation, that you can't take communion until you understand what it's all about, is one of the aspects of the Roman Catholic Church that the Anglicans retained. Most Protestant denomination don't have rules about who can take communion -- the Methodists, for example, practice what they call "Open Table", meaning anyone can participate, Methodist or not, even Christian or not (I once had to assist a Hindu guy who'd happened to come to church out of curiosity on the one Sunday of the month that we had communion.)

reply to post by adjensen


Yes, precisely. I am fully aware of how the Church of England came to be to begin with, as a historian interested in that period of English history (I used to be a performer at our local Renaissance Festival, too, and one year my daughter had the role of Mary, Henry's daughter presenting her as the daughter of Catherine, who Henry divorced and then married Ann Boleyn. The year before I had been the Queen's Maid of Honor for that Ann Boleyn character.

Afterward, I became a 'female bandit' type - turned out I wasn't a very good Queen's Lady in Waiting, I was always peeling off to talk to the pirates. LOL! Our director could see that I wasn't cut out for "courtly behavior", although I did a good job as that character, too. Mostly. It was fun, though. I don't do that anymore now since a couple of years, but who knows if I might return to it one day.)

Like I said, I'd have been reared a Catholic if my grandmother hadn't been excommunicated when she married my divorced grandfather in the 1930s. She switched to Anglican because of that, and I was always taught it was the "RCC-lite," kinda.

Protestants attack the Catholic Church because they lack understanding and knowledge. People became Protestants because they could not understand St. Thomas Aquinas.

Originally posted by truthius
Protestants attack the Catholic Church because they lack understanding and knowledge. People became Protestants because they could not understand St. Thomas Aquinas.

edit on 19-4-2013 by truthius because: (no reason given)

People become Catholic or Protestant because they love tradition over truth.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by truthius
Protestants attack the Catholic Church because they lack understanding and knowledge. People became Protestants because they could not understand St. Thomas Aquinas.

edit on 19-4-2013 by truthius because: (no reason given)

People become Catholic or Protestant because they love tradition over truth.

That isn't biblical. Jesus said no man could come to Him unless the Father first draw that man. And He said in John 15:16 that we didn't chose Him, but He chose us and to go and produce fruit and that fruit should remain.

No man can have faith in Christ unless drawn by the Father and that faith given to a man by grace.

reply to post by truthius


SOME people became Protestants because Henry VIII forced them to; because he wanted a divorce, and he and the Pope went round and round about it before he finally said, "Enough! Get out of England! I declare now that I AM THE LEADER of English religion."

Then he divorced her.

This is the actual impetus for the break-off from Rome by the Church of England.
Many, many current born-Protestant people are the descendants of those people who Henry forced to denounce the Roman Catholic Church.

The Church of England - and later called "Anglican" and "Episcopalian" - still kept up with communion, the Nicene Creed, etc. They just loosened up the rules a little, and then persecuted the Roman Catholics, forced them underground. From there, Martin Luther and Oliver Cromwell and his ilk (the Lollers) ran with it - thus there were "Puritans" - and the "New World Great Experiment" was born.

Other people later became Protestants (like my Grandmother) because the RCC disallowed divorcees to remarry, etc.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by truthius
Protestants attack the Catholic Church because they lack understanding and knowledge. People became Protestants because they could not understand St. Thomas Aquinas.

edit on 19-4-2013 by truthius because: (no reason given)

People become Catholic or Protestant because they love tradition over truth.

That isn't biblical. Jesus said no man could come to Him unless the Father first draw that man. And He said in John 15:16 that we didn't chose Him, but He chose us and to go and produce fruit and that fruit should remain.

No man can have faith in Christ unless drawn by the Father and that faith given to a man by grace.

Catholics and Protestants don't have faith in Christ. Rejection of repentance and baptism in the name of Christ is evidence.

Originally posted by truejew
Catholics and Protestants don't have faith in Christ.

Stop lying about other people's beliefs that you have absolutely no way of knowing. You're becoming as elitist and hateful as Reckart.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by truejew
Catholics and Protestants don't have faith in Christ.

Stop lying about other people's beliefs that you have absolutely no way of knowing. You're becoming as elitist and hateful as Reckart.

Tell us how a person who rejects what is commanded by Christ's apostles possibly have faith in Christ.

And it is not "hateful" to inform someone of their sinful state and show them the way out. It is love.

reply to post by truejew


Yeah, you really need to stop it. You aren't God, nor the "boss" of us, and it's none of your damned business whether others believe what you do or not. Catholics and Protestants are doing just fine. Your hatred and "love" is appalling.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by truejew

 

Yeah, you really need to stop it. You aren't God, nor the "boss" of us,

I never claimed to be either.

Originally posted by wildtimes

and it's none of your damned business whether others believe what you do or not.

My "business" is to spread the Gospel and answer the question, "what shall we do".

Originally posted by wildtimes
Your hatred and "love" is appalling.

You should check out the hate done by Catholics and Protestants through out history.