ROMAN CATHOLICISM: A DIFFERENT GOSPEL

Apprising Ministries ^ | January 16, 2008 | Ken Silva

[Manfred the Wonder Dawg]

ROMAN CATHOLICISM: A DIFFERENT GOSPEL

In their lust for unity the Emergent Church and post-evangelical “Protestants” are right now embracing the Roman Catholic Church as another Christian denomination. But the issue is simple: If, as taught the Church of Rome, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without “the new birth in baptism” then we are now in hopeless contradiction with the Gospel contained in Holy Scripture.

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8)

Speaking The Truth In Love

Let me make this as clear as I possibly can for the Roman Catholics who may read this work in Christ from Apprising Ministries. I personally am former member of the Church of Rome and care very deeply about those, such as the majority of my own family line, who are trapped in this apostate man-made system of religion known as Roman Catholicism. I also fully realize that what I say may sound “unloving” and possibly even “harsh.” However, there is just nothing that I can do about that. By not telling the Truth we aren’t doing anyone a service.

[Quix]

“Tradition” is meaningless as history.

= =

INDEED.

I don’t know about 100% utterly meaningless but pretty durn close.

[Marysecretary]

You both do good! Mxxx

[wmfights]

You are very kind, thank you.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Though, the idea that the Holy Spirit indwells the baby prior to Faith is not consistent with Scripture.

But if we see baptism in the NT as the same type of covenant sign and seal that circumcision was in the OT, we can understand its meaning more fully.

The Jews in the OT were commanded by God to circumcise their children as a sign of God's election.

That's what baptism is -- a sign of God's election within the covenant family of the covenant congregation.

Baptism does not confer this election, like the RCC teaches. Instead, baptism is an acknowledgment of this election.

I can understand non-reformed Baptists believing in adult baptism because they (incorrectly) believe faith is a free-will choice men make. But I don't understand reformed Baptists insisting on adult baptism when they correctly believe their salvation by God predates their public declaration of faith and that God's election of them is the very reason for their faith in the first place.

Presbyterian churches (and no doubt others) have confirmation classes for new members and young adults entering into full participation in the congregation. This is a public testimony of their faith, and it is good and affirmative for all involved.

But it's not a sacrament.

The two sacraments most Bible-believing Christians acknowledge as God-ordained involve the same thing -- a recognition of God's predestining grace in bringing us to Him, from the beginning of our lives to our very last day on earth.

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH
Chapter XXVIII
Of Baptism

I. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ,[1] not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church;[2] but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace,[3] of his ingrafting into Christ,[4] of regeneration,[5] of remission of sins,[6] and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life.[7] Which sacrament is, by Christ's own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.[8]

II. The outward element to be used in this sacrament is water, wherewith the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, by a minister of the Gospel, lawfully called thereunto.[9]

III. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring, or sprinkling water upon the person.[10]

IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ,[11] but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.[12]

V. Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance,[13] yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it:[14] or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.[15]

VI. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered;[16] yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongs unto, according to the counsel of God's own will, in His appointed time.[17]

VII. The sacrament of Baptism is but once to be administered unto any person.[18]

Therefore baptism acknowledges that the Holy Ghost truly and graciously and freely inhabits every member of God's family from the moment of their birth. And at a time of God's choosing, that fact will be made known to that person by the indwelling Holy Ghost and that person will know he is part of God's eternal family...according to God's will.

All who have been given and will be given saving faith in Christ's sacrifice alone were numbered among His family from before the foundation of the world. And in God's own good time, they will know that; they will repent; they will obey; they will thank God; and they will glorify God.

Which of us reformed Christians believes the Holy Ghost is not guiding our children from their first breath?

"For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy." -- 1 Corithians 7:14

---

"And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them.

But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein." -- Luke 18:15-17

We are either numbered among His family from before the foundation of the world, or we're not. That's just how life is.

[RobbyS]

Luther was convinced he was right. He absolutely no interest in reconciling with the pope That would have entailed his accepting Erasmus’ views which, as you know Luther refused to do. The radical Catholic Reformers also despised Erasmus. Somewhat like Constantine in the 4th Century. the Emperor wanted a political solution to a theological issue, But neither the Reformers nor the Archcatholics wanted this. As to my charge againbst Melanthon , read the Protestation of Worms. It is not an honest formulation of the true Lutheran position. In Melanthon’s case, he came very close to Calvinism is his later writings when he was no longer dominated by Luther’s overwhelming personality.

[Marysecretary]

Well, a church IS a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints (LOL).

[RobbyS]

Why limit the power of the Holy Spirit? IAC, Peter did baptize the whole household of Cornelius. Of course the doctrine is not consistent with your doctrine of grace, but your’s is just one way of looking at Scripture.

[wmfights]

Baptism does not confer this election, like the RCC teaches. Instead, baptism is an acknowledgment of this election.

I don't disagree.

But I don't understand reformed Baptists insisting on adult baptism when they correctly believe their salvation by God predates their public declaration of faith and that God's election of them is the very reason for their faith in the first place.

I am not insisting on adult Baptism if we are recognizing it is an ordinance and the saving Grace of God is not infused in the process. If it is being stated that the Holy Spirit is indwelling non believers because of the actions of a pastor/priest I am saying it is wrong.

The role of Baptism in Scripture is following Faith and is a public declaration of being a Christian. If infants are being baptized as a public declaration of their being raised in a Christian home, being the member of a Christian church I don't believe it is contradictory.

However, if the act of Baptism is claimed to infuse the Grace of God into a non believer I'm saying that is not consistent with Scripture.

[1000 silverlings]

But I don't understand reformed Baptists insisting on adult baptism when they correctly believe their salvation by God predates their public declaration of faith and that God's election of them is the very reason for their faith in the first place.

We see it as an act of obedience, just as any other ordinance, so it is not required for salvation, but the doing of it and publicly brings great joy, to which I have previously attested. I see it as a great gift that the Lord graciously let me participate in.

[Marysecretary]

So we’re supposed to just sit by and let our Catholic brothers and sisters die in their error? Boy, that’s loving.

[OLD REGGIE]

Luther was convinced he was right. He absolutely no interest in reconciling with the pope...

"Luther was convinced he was right."

More and more so as time went by.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"He had absolutely no interest in reconciling with the pope"... due to a large extent to his lack of trust in the integrity of the pope.

[Marysecretary]

Some are Christians and some are not. Just belonging to the church and being baptized doesn’t mean you’re a Christian, Ann. It’s all about receiving Jesus Christ into your life and putting your faith and trust in Him. It has little or nothing to do with the church. The church may be where you learn about Him, but YOU have to make the decision to whether you will follow him or not. Mxxx

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I like threads like this. Gives me a chance to spout off. ;)

I like your attitude. How else do we learn?

[Marysecretary]

Good points, wf.

[Alamo-Girl]

It is not elaborated on in the Scripture cited, so, since there is no self-referencing of the passage in Scripture itself, the definition you use must come from a different source.

To the contrary, I receive Scripture as a whole revelation. When I say I do not engage in discussions of genealogies and offer you Titus 3:9 as reference, I’m speaking of “genealogy” in Light of the Word of God.

Jesus announced the difference between the genealogical promise (Judaism) and the faith promise (Christianity.)

And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. – Matthew 3:9

Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. – John 8:53-59

And again,

For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. – Romans 4:13

Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. – Galatians 3:6-9

Our Father is God, not man. Christ explains the family this way:

While he yet talked to the people, behold, [his] mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. – Matthew 12:46-50

And again, the family of God is born of God alone:

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. - John 1:12-13

If the family of God were born “of blood” or “of the will of the flesh” or “of the will of man” then it would be indeed genealogical either by birth (blood) or something physical like laying on of hands (flesh) or desire/ideology (will).

But it is not. We are born of God.

The lesson with reference to the third part, will, can be seen in Simon’s desire to buy the Holy Spirit from Peter so that he could pass it on himself by laying on hands (flesh.) (Acts 8)

The lesson of the first two parts is in the conversion of Cornelius. Cornelius was not Jewish (blood.) Moreover, he was born into the family of God (received the Spirit) before Peter layed his hands on him, baptized him or even finished telling him about Jesus (flesh). (Acts 10:44-47, Acts 11:15-17, Acts 15:1)

As Peter said, “what was I that I could withstand God?”

So there is only one genealogy that matters – we must be born again.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. – John 3:6-7

If you, magisterium, were reborn when someone laid his hands on you in the Catholic sacrament of confirmation, then good for you. But give God the glory. It wasn’t the man or his hands or the sacrament or the lineage of the Catholic church – but God who make you anew.

Likewise, if someone else was reborn under different circumstances, then good for them. But give God the glory. Because God alone makes any of us anew.

Thus I again aver that I will not engage in discussion of genealogies – whether of blood, flesh or will. It is vanity.

Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: [so do]. – I Timothy 1:4

But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. – Titus 3:9

To God be the glory!

For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. - Romans 8:15

[TASMANIANRED]

Freedom of religion for thee but not for me.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

That's why we consider it so important to baptize the babies as soon as possible.

Or else what? God will let our children slip into fatal error if we tarry a bit too long?

Your statement illustrates our differences perfectly. The error the RCC teaches is that before baptism a child is on his own, and after the sacrament has been administered, that child is then a child of God. So when RCs tell us their sacrament of baptism doesn't actually confer salvation, we have it from you that indeed, it (supposedly) does...

Now you have it; now you don't. Now you're acquitted; now you're condemned. Now you're a child of God; now you're not. Now you're a member of His family; now you're not. Now you're saved; now you're lost.

It doesn't work that way.

"And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days." -- Acts 10:42-48

[Marysecretary]

Hey Quix. Wondered when you’d pop in. Love, Mxxx

[hosepipe]

[ We will have to disagree, given the Church's interpretation of the naming of Peter and the handing of the keys to the kingdom ]

True...

[hosepipe]

[ Again the I COR12 passage seems to apply ]

I Cor 12,13,14 go together.. ch 13 is just the comic relief.. Ch 12 and 14 are very serious..