How do we record that on the scorecard? We are keeping score, aren't we?
Here's a commentary on this item "from a more reformed and baptistic viewpoint".
That is an excellent commentary and right to the point. I'm not surprised or amazed to see Evangelical Protestants moved to Catholicism. (I liked the term "Evanjellycal".) There isn't much difference anymore. Tsk, tsk to us Protestants.
Perhaps if the Donut Man had a pastor that could have explained the Biblical faith to him clearly, he would have understood what he was rejecting.
Which Biblical faith?? The Presbyterian one.....the Methodist one.....the Lutheran one........the "Church of What's Happening Now" one.....
He probably had several such pastors. And they all told him different things. That is likely one cause of his conversion.
"Biblical faith" is like beauty. Lots of people talk about it but nobody can agree on what it is.
Well, somebody must be - if they weren't, we wouldn't keep getting these "guess who swam the Tiber now?" threads.
And BTW, I agree with HarleyD - that was a great commentary you linked us to. Many thanks!
They [Evangelicals who have converted] quite often speak in terms of the Reformation while denying the Reformation's Biblical foundation....You have to wonder why. Could it be that functionally speaking, most Evanjellycal Protestants are Roman Catholic? Could it be that the man-centered preaching and teaching has been taking its toll? Could it be the denial of sound Biblical theology in favor of Protestant Traditions (Ohhhh do Protestants have their Traditions)?
From your link:
http://how2fish.blogspot.com/2006/09/donut-man-should-make-us-think.html
Howard Fisher said...
Tiber,
1) Thanks for the list of names. I already hinted at in my original post that they mean nothing. Should I reproduce a list of names in reverse? Would that prove anything?
2) "You can ask me how I have peace with God if you want."
The one thing I asked for, you didn't provide. You simply do not have peace with God. Although I am sure you think so. It is however, not a biblical peace. Without the Imputation of Christ's righteousness, Paul plainly teaches you have no peace.
3) "I suspect he thought about this a bit before converting..."
I am sure he did. I have found men convert for all kinds of reasons. Then they often respond to Protestant doctrines like Sola Scriptura as being unbiblical. Yet their desription of those doctrines are never correct. So they leave not knowing with accuracy what they are rejecting.
4) Anonymous wants to be obedient. Yet I must ask. Is this interpretation of John 6 his private interpretation? Rome has never taught John 6 to say what he says it says.
Perhaps I need to start another sacrament. I will get a door with a doorknob and a dead bolt. Then I will get a priest to bless the door so that it actually becomes the Door of Christ. Then I will walk through it. Since Jesus claims to be a door, wouldn't that work too?
John 6 is one of my favorite passages. It strikes me that you will interpret that portion of that passage in such a fashion and also ignore the exegesis provided by Reformed Protestants.
What in essence you have done is accept the final authority of Rome's dogmatics as the governing interpretive lense. You simply are not allowed the text of god's Word to speak. In other words, you must by definition force Rome's teachings into Scripture.
5) I must ask you both if you were truly Protestants. Did you believe in penal substitutionary atonement? Do you still do so? If so, you are in rebellion against Rome's teaching.
Perhaps my original question should be asked. Who is the Blessed man of Romans 4? Do you have peace with God? On what basis do you claim to have this peace?