Posted on 04/13/2008 5:51:16 PM PDT by Edward Watson
I think I was referring to Post #59. Of course, perhaps I misinterpreted what you wrote, but it appeared at first glance the substance of your post did imply your making that argument. If I was wrong, Mea Culpa.
Regards
My view is that when 99% of your religious message is how much you dislike Catholics, then you really don't have much else worth having.
You were wrong. I wasn't making the argument for myself, but rather against intellectually lazy Catholic apologetics. If you want to know my thoughts on the matter, see my take on creeds and my assessment of the "trail of blood".
Well Alex, I was indeed incorrect. I have never been able to determine just what Protestant Branch you belong too, but in your defense of Creeds, it appears you are clearly within the Historical Protestant Confessions, which puts you somewhat closer to Historic Apostolic Tradition (Catholic and Eastern Orthodox) than the Protestant groups that split from the Lutherans, Anglicans and Calvinist/Reformed Protesant Groups.
So based on your last post, I would now conjecture you are most likely 1)Calivinist-Presbyterian, 2) Calvinist-Reformed, 3) Lutheran perhaps, but not likely.
Anwyay, I am glad to see that with respect to the Baptist “Trail of Blood”, that you and I actually agree.
Regards
“I refuse to proselytize in an overt way online; at the same time, I feel no need to agree to agree just because it’s the nice thing to do. If what I believe is correct, compromising on anything less is morally wrong and dangerous.
False unity is not unity.”
This Catholic agrees. Well worth saying again.
Breathtaking and of course wrong. It is a concept that even all Protestants don't buy into to, more or less catholics. Jesus saved us when he died for our sins. We can accept that salvation or reject it at any time we want.Sin is a rejection of God. Unless you believe that once you are "born again" you cant sin you will have to run the race to the end.
Well, I respectively disagree with your assessment. I think they are very relevant with respect to the question that the Baptist Tradition existed before Luther and Calvin. What I stated with respect to the Catholic Church can be historically defended my reputable scholars, and all of the Top Patristic Scholars in non-Catholic Christianity in the last 20-30 years (Henry Chadwick, J.N.D. Kelly, Jaroslav Pelikan, etc) have works on the early Church that are consistent with what I wrote. On the other hand, the Baptist Tradition is an offshoot of the earlier Protestant Traditions that preceded it.
Good day
Discuss the issues all you want, but do NOT make it personal. Click on my profile page for more guidelines pertaining to the Religion Forum.
No doubt.
Can you imagine the shrieks of rage if one might percieve me to be NOT of this worldd?
You, know, I’m just going to have to go somewhere else (if you don’t mind).
“We must also stand together with anyone, regardless of belief or disbelief, as long as they want to preserve our freedom and way of life.”
When I stand before Christ, I cannot speak for my neighbor’s faith. It is my faith alone that seals me to Him. To ask me to stand with my neighbor and vouch for them as a neighbor, bears attestment to false belief. For I may call my neighbor to look towards Christ, but his soul is his own and he must choose the Savior for himself. I will not compromise my faith in vouching for an unbeliever. It is God’s role to save His own, not mine.
God’s distinctions and call for pure faith are more exacting than the points that you list. I would not rely on this type of list for salvation. And I think it is a sorry example of a starting point.
Go back to the New Testament.
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.