| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 08/18/2010 1:37:43 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
The article does not qualify for a caucus because it mentions the beliefs of non-members. |
Posted on 08/18/2010 9:52:35 AM PDT by TheBattman
Good. Now please ask yourself, what happens if you sin to a greater or lesser degree just before death.
Please consider the following cases:
a) You are a great Christian, but you are angry with someone, don't forgive them, and then you are run over by a car.
b) You are a great Christian, but you are angry with someone, and you set fire to their dog, and then you are run over by a car.
c) You are a great Christian, but you are angry with someone, and you murder them, and then, you know, splat.
In each case - what happens? Are the results in each case all exactly the same?
The reality is that in cases a) and b) you would arrive before the beatific vision of God, but the (arguably) minor sins you carried with you would have injured your soul to a greater or lesser extent. God would heal you of the effect of these venial sins, but the process would hurt. (See Luke and Corinthians above).
And in case c) you would have committed a mortal sin right before death. You broke your soul and are now beyond the time of repentance: hell is your likely reward. In such a situation it would be vain to protest that Christ died for you, so your sins somehow don’t matter – you would have rejected God.
As a “reformed” and a “non-Catholic”, i dont think this should be a caucus...
The very believers in this topic have been shut out...
Why dont you open it up to all ???
I found this one pretty easily.
This thread attacks the non-Catholic view of communion and indicates that non-Catholic Christians are not "fit" to participate in communion in a Catholic church. Therefore, give the logic expressed here by Catholics, one can easily argue that the thread at the link does not qualify as a caucus.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2571404/posts
If the Catholics here agree that discussion of their beliefs disqualifies this as a caucus thread, then I'm sure you won't mind my going to the link above and expressing my non-Catholic views - right?
He didn't, however, destroy our free will, nor remove our ability to reject Him.
It is Pharisaical - and damnable - to believe that our sins somehow don't matter because 'we are saved'. Our sins do matter, and we must repent of them. We are not saved yet. We are being saved.
God indeed saves us and absolves us. But He will not pre-empt our Free Will, and will not save us against our will. Until we are safe with Him in heaven we can still turn against Him and injure - or even destroy - our souls.
Jesus died for that sin as well as any other I may commit. I will go immediately to heaven (assuming the car has killed me).
b) You are a great Christian, but you are angry with someone, and you set fire to their dog, and then you are run over by a car.
Well, I would never do this, but for purposes of argument - again, Jesus died for this sin as well as any others I may commit. I would go immediately to heaven.
c) You are a great Christian, but you are angry with someone, and you murder them, and then, you know, splat.
Same as the answer to b.
In each case - what happens? Are the results in each case all exactly the same?
Yes, because the blood of Jesus is sufficient. He said, "It is finished" or "tetelestai" (meaning the debt is paid - I believe that's spelled correctly). At any rate, I know I could not save myself by doing "stuff" to begin with, so why would I think I can keep myself saved by doing "stuff"?
As Christians we do "stuff", but it is because of the Holy Spirit within us, not because we are trying to do something now that we never had the power to do in the first place.
No.
Of course, but His physical flesh was human. After all, God is spirit, as scripture says.
So how is this any different than a typical [reformed/non-catholic] church service? I thought their purpose in life was to prove that they weren’t [catholic].
My vote is that the [caucus] label should stand. It says more about them than it does about us.
RM, please delete this post and all posts by Catholics on this thread. Thanks.
“You do believe that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully human, do you not? Please show me where that doctrine/teaching appears in God’s Word.”
“...they shall call his name EMMANUEL, which being interpreted is, GOD WITH US.”
—MATTHEW 1:23
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God John 1:1
the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us...John 1:14
God is the first and the last.
I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he. Isaiah 41:4
Jesus is the first and the last.
Jesus said, “Fear not; I am the first and the last:” Revelation 1:17
God is the only Saviour.
“I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.” Isaiah 43:11
...the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world. 1 John 4:14
Indeed, as a remembrance and to identify us as belonging to Him, not to save us. He did that through His sacrifice. (Of course, I know Catholics have a different belief on that issue.)
ooohh...Could it possibly be a strawman just caught fire? LOL!!
So ... I could commit murder an hour before my death, and die impenitent, even cursing God and that's OK. I'm going to heaven. Because Christ died for my sins.
Why then trouble to follow a single commandment? After all, 'Christ died for my sins'. I can be the most heinous serial killer, and spit in the eye of the Priest at my execution. Its all good, because - hey - 'Christ died for my sins'.
I hope, thus baldly stated, that this kind of 'faith' can be seen to be as crazy and as hellish as that of any death cultist.
We must repent of our sins, and also stop doing them. Christ saves us and frees us of our sins, and is always ready to forgive us. But we must will it, we must cooperate with our salvation. It doesn't happen despite ourselves.
Hope this was helpful.
"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not us." -- 1 John 1:8
The miracle of Christianity is that while we are yet sinners Jesus Christ covers us in His righteousness and His obedience and His good work on the cross so that we can stand before the throne of judgment acquitted of our sins by Christ taking on the punishment rightly due us.
Here's a great link which explains the difference between the Protestant, Scriptural understanding of justification and Rome's error which not only leads men into anxiety and fear (since no man can obey the law perfectly) but also paves the way for the anti-Scriptural, grace-denying fever dream of purgatory...
The Bible teaches that God accepts men solely on the merits of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:21-4:8; Phil. 3:8-9). Men are declared righteous because their guilt is imputed to Christ on the cross, and Christ’s perfect righteousness is imputed to the believer’s account. Romanism teaches that grace is infused into man and that people are justified only after becoming righteous. Justification is subjective; it is the internal renovation and renewing of man. Men are justified because of what the Holy Spirit does in them. “Justification means that man himself is made just—made pleasing to God in his own person.... A devout Catholic may say: ‘Righteousness by faith means that I cannot save myself, but by faith I can receive God’s transforming grace. His grace can change my heart, and by His grace in my heart I can be acceptable in His sight....’ The focal point of Catholic theology is God’s work of grace within human experience.”59 The Scriptures teach that justification is an instantaneous act of God. It is whole, never repeated, eternal and perfect, not piecemeal or gradual (Jn. 5:25; Lk. 18:13, 14; 23:43; Rom. 4:5; 5:1; 8:3-8). Romanism teaches that justification is a gradual process which may not even be completed in this life. It usually is completed by the tortures of purgatory.60 The Bible teaches that sinners are saved solely because of what God has done in Jesus Christ. Papal doctrine affirms that justification is a cooperative effort between God and man. Man must cooperate with inward grace until he achieves justification. The Roman Catholic believes that good works contribute to his salvation. However, he would argue that since these good works flow from inward grace, that ultimately he is saved by grace and not by works. Romanism is the most clever attempt of man to take a religion of human merit, works-righteousness and personal achievement and dress it with the terminology of grace. Romanism teaches “the most subtle form of the doctrine of justification by works that has yet appeared, or that can appear. For the doctrines of Trent do not teach, in their canonical statements, that man is justified and accepted at the bar of justice by his law. This is, indeed, the doctrine that prevails in the common practice of the papal church, but it is not the form in which it appears in the Tridentine canons. According to these, man is justified by an inward and spiritual act which is denominated the act of faith; by a truly divine and holy habit or principle infused by the gracious working of the Holy Spirit. The ground of the sinner’s justification is thus a divine and gracious one. God works in the sinful soul to will and to do, and by making it inherently just justifies it. And all this is accomplished through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ; so that, in justification there is a combination of the objective work of Christ with the subjective character of the believer.”61 Protestants who are not aware of these subtleties are often tongue-tied in debates with knowledgeable Roman Catholics, because Romanists insist they do not believe in salvation by works-righteousness. They simply assert that God is the author of infused grace and inherent righteousness. The Romish system is easily exposed as a doctrine of demons when one considers that their theory of an inward infused grace in the heart as a second pillar of justification clearly means that they regard the death of Christ as insufficient for pardon. For them “Christ alone” is not enough. Jesus, according to their statements of faith, did not perfectly satisfy God’s justice by His life and death. Romanism is in reality a cleverly disguised form of humanism. “The Protestant trusts Christ to save him and the Roman Catholic trusts Christ to help him save himself.”62The Roman Catholic looks at what Christ accomplished as something that enables a person to begin a long journey that possibly leads to salvation. The Protestant looks to Christ and His merits as salvation itself. Good works prove that justification has already occurred. They do not contribute one iota toward salvation.63... ... The Bible teaches that justification is a legal declaration of God in heaven regarding the sinner who believes on earth. Justification is objective. The Romanist confounds the doctrine of justification with sanctification. “The Tridentine theory makes inward holiness in conjunction with the merits of Christ the ground of justification. It founds human salvation upon two corner-stones.... The unintentional confounding of the distinction between justification and sanctification, which appears occasionally in the Patristic writers, becomes a deliberate and unemphatic identification, in the scheme of the Papal church.”58
It appears that Catholics ARE! Which means, while they're technically violating the religious thread rules, no one is moderating and enforcing those rules on THIS thread (though Dutchboy88 tried to enforce the rule in post number 62).
What it would hurt is that it's just making a sham of the whole caucus process. That puts a big gray area on what was up to this point cut and dry.
Either drop the caucus status, or delete the Catholic replies.
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.