Posted on 10/25/2009 5:47:50 AM PDT by NYer
Many reasons...One being is that it is not the Church that saves...The church IS the saved...There are no weeds in the church...
There are some in your Church who ARE the church...But your Church is not the church...
The saved like to lead the unsaved to the church, not the Church...
If you say I must believe in the Assumption of Mary to be saved, then it would conflict with Sola Scriptura, since "...from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
If it is a matter of belief NOT required for salvation (or "every good work", which may be more encompassing), then it does NOT need to be found in scripture.
**So if we can be saved, why all the fuss about how we worship?**
Because that is the barrier to most RCs.
Scripture means what it says, not what you interpret it to mean.
So then sola Scriptura is not required for salvation.
No. No one needs to know what Sola Scriptura means, let alone agree with it, to be saved.
I’m pretty certain the Ethiopian eunuch didn’t discuss the issue with Philip. It didn’t prevent his salvation or baptism.
I guess we also have to remember that they quote from a different bible than we use. The KJV is not the Douay-Rheims that we have used for eternity.
Joh 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Joh 20:20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.
Joh 20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
Joh 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
Joh 20:23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
How many disciples were there??? Jesus is NOT just talking to the Apostles...Mary Magdeline was certainly a disciple...And many, many others...
So what was the requirement here??? That a person be a disciple AND be filled with the Holy Ghost...Does it mention Apostle, or Apostolic succession??? Nope...
Your religion has built yet another a heretical doctrine out of false teaching and distortion of the scriptures...
It is, in fact, a serious impediment to salvation, since it truly lives up to the fullest reputation of a false tradition of men by causing so many to reject the Church founded by Christ and roll out on their own, trying to find prophecy of Scripture on their own interpretation...even to the point of denying their own God-given gifts of logic and common sense.
Upon whom did He breathe?
Douay-Rheims:
“19 Now when it was late that same day, the first of the week, and the doors were shut, where the disciples were gathered together, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them: Peace be to you. 20 And when he had said this, he shewed them his hands and his side. The disciples therefore were glad, when they saw the Lord.
19 “The doors were shut”... The same power which could bring Christ’s whole body, entire in all its dimensions, through the doors, can without the least question make the same body really present in the sacrament; though both the one and the other be above our comprehension.
21 He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. 22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”
To a Catholic when you speak of “diciples” you are talking about the Apostles.
OOPPPSSS diciples = disciples
This is the statement
>>As I said all Romanists can be saved...But most would no longer be Romanists...<<
For the sake of common good, let’s forgo the insulting “Romanists”. Only Catholics in Rome care about Roman -ist (suffix -ist meaning doer)
Latin Catholics can but really don’t care about those Italians that live in Rome. So are you saying that Latin Catholics can be saved?
Because if they are no longer Latin Catholics, then they are no longer Latin Catholics.
Sola Scriptura weeds OUT a lot of false traditions, such as Purgatory, Priests, Popes, etc. All to the good.
Of course it does. John states that very clearly. Do we just go through the Bible to extract those texts that fit our chosen lifestyle (like the christian lesbians and homosexuals) or follow Christ's commands and direction? Jesus granted the Apostles His authority to forgive sins. In John 20:21 - before He grants them the authority to forgive sins, Jesus says to the apostles, "as the Father sent me, so I send you." As Christ was sent by the Father to forgive sins, so Christ sends the apostles and their successors forgive sins. In the very next line, the Lord "breathes" on the apostles, and then gives them the power to forgive and retain sins. Why go through this effort if we are all forgiven our sins? In Matt. 18:18, the apostles are given authority to bind and loose. The authority to bind and loose includes administering and removing the temporal penalties due to sin. The Jews understood this since the birth of the Church.
Scripture is very clear on this matter.
I have NOT tried to pick and choose. I pointed out that we are sent as Jesus was sent by the Father...and cited the examples in scripture where He forgave sins.
If you can find an example of his taking confession, or of any of the Apostles listening to confessions, cite them.
Otherwise, WE - not just Apostles, and it was NOT just Apostles in John 20 - are called to proclaim the Gospel: forgiveness of sins by faith in Jesus. That is what Jesus did.
John's passages clearly demonstrate how Christ granted the Apostles (and their successors) His authority to forgive sins. Why go through the process of instituting a Sacrament if everyone can just confess their sins to God and assume that in so doing, they are forgiven. In His great mercy, our Lord put in place a means by which we could unburden ourselves of our sins and know, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that we were forgiven.
We can, with good will, argue over Sabbatarianism and Judaizing generally. We can lament the anti-Semitism of that age, of this age, and of intervening ages.
But we are not going to get anywhere useful if you guys don't get that practices aren't initiated by their prescription. Councils and the like more often resolve conflicts than initiate new practices. Many many Catholics believed in the real presence before the doctrine was defined. It is the same for the Marian Dogmata, and it was the same for Sunday worship and quartodecimanism. TO point to a document and say it represents the beginning of a practice is to make an assumption, not an argument.
Is the Bible the "pillar of truth" in the Christian religion? No. According to the Bible Itself, the Church is the "pillar of truth" (1 Timothy 3:15), not the Bible.
His who?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.