In Christ Alone (Happy reformation day)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExnTlIM5QgE ^ | Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;

[RnMomof7]

In Christ Alone lyrics

Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;

In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm

What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand

In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save

?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live

There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again

And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ

[HossB86]

Odd... I don’t seeing where said anything about the pope “ruling” anyone. Putting words in mouths again I see.

Odd still: everyone bows and kisses his ring.

Hoss

[HossB86]

Sorry. Tiny keyboard. Should be:

“I don’t recall seeing where I said anything about ruling...”

Hoss

[presently no screen name]

Then no rituals,

Rituals? That's Catholic lingo.

not even waving of the hands, is necessary, no works, not even going to church

Necessary? They are expressing, on their own, what is within their hearts.

Protestants make fun of Catholics/Orthodox and their "empty rituals", while

I've never seen Protestants making fun of them standing, sitting, kneeling ON COMMAND. It's pitiful. Don't take correction for condemnation. But that's the last thing Catholics want or can handle - correction. Besides, the RCC is a dead church - the mass is a ritual - so down pat you know exactly what will be said/done, the congregants response, etc. All ritual.

while they themselves wave aimlessly in the air as if saying "I am here!" to an omnipresent omniscient God.

Aimlessly? They ALREADY know God is within them. You are coming from the RCC beliefs. You will never understand how/why Christians worship as they do since they KNOW God through fellowship.

[xone]

ph

[kosta50]

Besides, the RCC is a dead church

LOL!

They ALREADY know God is within them.

So, who are they waving at? I just had another "Proddy" (as he calls himself) tell me they are reaching out to get "as close as possible" to God. Sometimes I think the Protestants really have no clue what they are talking about, or maybe they talk form both sides of the mouth.

You are coming from the RCC beliefs

Too much mind reading. I have never been a Roman Catholic.

You will never understand how/why Christians worship as they do since they KNOW God through fellowship.

Fellowship? They are fellows with their maker? The pot is a "buddy" (fellow) with the potter; the chair with the carpenter; the uncreated with the created? More doubletlak...but it sounds good.

[kosta50]

It is the same God, who was and is and is to come

Really?

[caww]

And God provided the way for believers to boldly enter into the holy of holies by the blood of Jesus (Heb. 10:19) so that they may commune with Him (not Mary. etc.). May we use this privilege more to worship and pray to Him.

Your scripture ref. immediately brought to mind the temple curtain being torn in half from top to bottom... evidencing Jesus had indeed accomplished for us what God required and which we could never satisfy...He satisfied Himself.. by His own blood.....which then led me to the Garden where God Himslef had to have slain animals in order to clothe Adam and Eve with their skins. So Pausing to reflect what this might have been like, visually in my mind, brings a great sense of humbleness and gratitude along with utter awe which cannot be put into words.... (As for Mary, of course she had no direct role in, she could only watch along with all the others.) It was all about Christ...and that for us.

I do not have a strong understanding of all the requirements the Jewish people had to do....the lists are broad as they are wide, so they had to have a means of atonement, it would be impossible to keep all those requirements. But I can see where the "scapegoat" comes in..and wasn't it sent outside the camp? Rather like Jesus was Crucified outside as well.... In fact it does become more clear that all the Jewish requirements and practices point to Christ directly and otherwise....

Truly astounding how the Bible does interpret itself when you study it....and you then can see it indeed could not have been authored any other way than by those directly influenced by His Spirit...it's just far too remarkable otherwise. Nor could it be understood without His Spirit since he authored it.

Sometimes it has been difficult to understand why Christianity is such a bloody religion....why God could have not gone some other way than this. But then I consider who He is and who we are without Him ... then it's clear there was no other way... for the depravity of man is far more serious then we see or understood in our day. Just as it's written...we sin like a cart-rope.. and think so little of the consequences...much less the cost.

I have rather gone on here but your posts generally cause one to look closer... and the Lord's Spirit takes it from there on for those who care to read and listen. Thank you for your words and instruction, though I know you will gladly give all the glory to Him..I still am grateful you are willing to share...it makes a difference to many I think. CW

[annalex]

It is not Protestantism which originated the teaching that the actual cause of justification is faith alone, Rather it is soundly based upon the scriptural statements that the precise basis for justification “is not of works,” “not by works of righteousness which we have done,” being “not according to our works”, that “God imputeth righteousness without works,” and is granted “to him that worketh not,” (Rm. 4: 5,6; 9:11; Gal. 2:16; Titus 3:5; 2Tim. 1:9) and that “this is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent,” for, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”

All these prooftexts of "Faith Alone" are silly. All, taken in context, speak of "works of the law" or "works of justice"; if you read around them they all at the same time urge good works. The difference is, of course, that works done out of legal obligation are thereby containing their own reward, -- Jewishness, when that legally mattered, in the case of the works of circumcising oneself and one's children, or generally social recognition and temporal freedoms that lawful life offers. Good works, on the other hand, are works done for no temporal reward and instead at a temporal cost: continence, constraint of the passions, denial of self. These, the Gospel teaches, are works that save alongside of faith because, like faith they are possible thanks to divine grace. This simple teaching is brilliantly illustrated by Eph 2:4-10:

[4] But God, (who is rich in mercy,) for his exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, [5] Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ, (by whose grace you are saved,) [6] And hath raised us up together, and hath made us sit together in the heavenly places, through Christ Jesus. [7] That he might shew in the ages to come the abundant riches of his grace, in his bounty towards us in Christ Jesus. [8] For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; [9] Not of works, that no man may glory. [10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them.

Salvation is by sovereign grace of God alone; that grace is not of works. We receive His grace for no merit of our own and our response is twofold, faith and good works. God plants in us the former and prepares us for the latter. We are saved by grace alone through faith and good works.

Of course, it is also a historical fact that "Faith Alone" was a slogan that emerged out of the so-called reformation. People prior to Luther were suffiently informed in the Holy Scripture to know that according to it, we are not saved by faith alone (James 2:24).

Rather than teaching that a faith without works is salvific, it [historical Protestantism?] affirms Jame's teaching ...

No it doesn't. The slogan "by Faith Alone" is diametrical opposite of James 2:24. That all the Protestant leaders, old and new, offer up some incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo of which that paragraph is a sample, is not surprising. But so long as the slogan stands, "Faith Alone", so do the anathemas of Trent stand. You cannot believe "A" and "not A" at the same time.

You cannot have one Scripture declaring that a soul is counted righteous because of faith, in contrast to merit of his works, (Eph. 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2Tim. 1:9) and another (it is supposed) teaching that works merit eternal life, which Rome teaches. While she and her defenders seek to make eternal life both a gift to and a reward, the two are Scripturally opposed to each other. (Rm. 6:23; 11:6)

All three, Eph 2:8-10, Titus 3:1-8, 2 Timothy 1:6-10 mention the importance of faith and also of good works. You carved out parts that speak of faith and neglected to also look at the immediate context of each of the three major prooftexts that you offer. (You wisely do not offer anything from Romans and Galatians here, because it must be clear to you that these speak narrowly of works of Jewish law). So, no, the scripture does teach that "soul is counted righteous because of faith", but it does not teach that the soul is counted righteous because of faith ALONE.

Let us turn our attention to your other scriptural references.

Genesis 15:6

"Abram believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice". Indeed. Annalex believes that one must do good works because that is what God says in Matthew 25:31-46. Abram then believed God and crossed the desert on a near-suicidal mission. He also believed God and was ready to sacrifice his beloved son. Catholic saints believed God when God said that that one must do good works and built universities and hospitals, and fought off the Turks. These were all works of faith. Faith without works is dead. Abraham was not saved by faith alone, but rather his faith co-operated with his works (James 2:23, Hebrews 11). We are not saved by faith alone.

Rm. 6:23

... is supposed to illustrate that eternal life is a gift rather than a reward. It is both, in fact: "Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to every man according to his works" (Rev. 22:12, note that the rest of the passage speaks precisely of the reward of eternal life given to holy people).

Rm. 11:6

"And if by grace, it is not now by works: otherwise grace is no more grace". Indeed. That is Catholic teaching: grace is not of works and we are saved by grace alone. You take a good and Catholic scripture that speaks of grace, and do a mental substitution of "faith" for "grace". That way, you can "prove" anything.

One either has confidence that his own works merit him acceptance before God, or he realizes himself a sinner

Why, there is no either-or here. St. Paul himself considered himself worst of sinners and at the same time understood that his works "fill what is wanting of the sufferings of Christ".

The apostle Paul clearly establishes that it is on the basis of God-given faith that one is justified by, not of works

Where, exactly? The prooftexts I am familiar with speak of works of the law but not good works of faith and love, to which St. Paul never tired of exhorting his reaers.

Consistent with what Paul himself taught elsewhere, what James is referring to is that the only faith that is salvific is the one that does work obedience, in contrast to one who simply professes but does not possess faith. Before Paul addressed the precise issue of faith versus works, he clearly stated, “For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.” (Rm. 2:13) And elsewhere he and other writers affirm that one can deny the faith by disobedience, (1Tim. 5:8; Gal. 5:1-5) and that it is those who obey Jesus who have eternal life. (Heb. 5:9) The key difference is that works are a result of saving faith, not the cause of justification.

Your examples are all good and teach the Catholic doctrine which you state well. Except, for no apparent reason, you conclude "works are a result of saving faith, not the cause of justification". That latter part is a theological fantasy not supported by scripture. If you substitute "grace" in that statement it becomes correct and Catholic, and also it then comes to reflect the scripture accurately. As you stated it, it reflects the Protestant error and nothing else.

salvation comes to the repentant who believe, (Lk. 16:9)

I believe you meant some different verse here. In general, yes, that is a true and Catholic statement that one who does penance and believes will be saved, because full and mature faith incorporates good works, including works of penance.

eternal life upon faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, (Jn. 5:24)

Yes, and what that faith really entails is explaned a few verses down, "And they that have done good things, shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; but they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment". Faith must be accompanied by good works. We are not saved by faith alone.

the obedient are given eternal life after consideration of their works. (Mt. 25:39-41)

The judgement in Matthew 25:31-46 is not a judgement of the obedient only, but rather of everyone, even, "every nation". The "goats" are clearly not among the obedient as they violated the commadnment given to all in Matthew 22:39, Mark 12:33.

Romans 10:9,10 also testified that it to is a faith which is confessional in quality that justifies

That is probably the best prooftext for Faith Alone as the explanation of the good works that go into that saving faith is deferred to the next several chapters. However, even in isolation, consider that the conclusion St Paul drives towards is that any one -- Greek or Jew -- can have the confessional faith. The polemics here is still with the Judaizers and the pruiported need to obey the Jewish law. but anyone who thinks that St. Paul preched salvation by faith alone in Romans 10 should skip over to Romans 12 and read things like "I BESEECH you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God, your reasonable service". That supposedly purely confessional faith of Romans 10:9 turns out to be nothing short of a living sacrifice. Faith Alone anyone?

[annalex]

Annalex: One who takes communion worthily s ready for heaven and eternal life, exactly as Jesus taught. "Whosoever believeth in him, may not perish; but may have life everlasting" (John 3:15)

MetMomThe verse you provided in no way supports your comment. You're talking about taking communion. The verse supports faith alone

John 3:15 does not teach faith alone. It teaches that one has to have faith. It does not in any way restrict that faith to being faith "alone". The reason I cited that is to explain to you that Christ promised everlasting life to some people. You had asked whether we believe that those taking the Holy Eucharist will have eternal life. I answered that yes, we do, just as you seem to believe in John 3:15. Or don't you?

Saying that [the saints are] alive in heaven is meaningless because all that's doing is taking one portion of the passage and interpreting it in a spiritual sense, and taking another portion and interpreting it in a literal, physical sense.

All passages about eternal life, in John 3, or John 6, or John 12:24-25 speak of tangible, real, literal life which is, just like our life, also spiritual. The difference is that it is not a life of the body just yet, but neither in John 6 Christ is promising the communicants life of the body. So this is how we believe all these verses, as promises of real tangible life in Heaven. For that reason, -- because the saints have real, tangible, eternal life now -- that we pray for their intercession.

If the Catholic church is going to demand that the host becomes the literal, physical flesh and blood of Jesus and that we must eat it literally and physically, then to be consistent in their interpretation, they must also teach that by doing so, the person will never die on this planet, that he will physically live forever here in this physical, material universe.

Why? Christ never insisted that eternal life is physical material life, quite the opposite (Luke 20:35-36); but he did insist that the Eucharistic species are His body and "food indeed" (John 6). We believe what Christ says. In stark contrast to the Protestant who believe their own theories.

the interpretation that communions is a symbolic representation of a spiritual truth

When the grain dies and wheat grows instead (John 12:25) it is not symbolic representation of a spiritual wheat but rather simply wheat. Read what is written, don't insert meanings you think should be there but aren't.

To reject that mercy and grace given freely as a gift by insisting on paying for it or earning it, is to spit in God's face

Indeed. Good thing we Catholics don't teach that. Grace is not of works, cannot be earned, and is given to all. It is a good idea to have a clue over what the Catholic Church teaches before opining about it. In fact, it is not a bad idea to read the Gospel every now and then before trying to figure out what eternal life means.

[annalex]

Can the Greek “eis”, English “is”, mean represent?

With Kolokotronis in 5848 I can only marvel where you people come up with this stuff.

Here's the side by side of the Greek original and Douay. Find your "eis", please. ("Eis" IS a Greek preposition, meaning variously, in, into, for, etc. It is not a form of the verb "to be". You see it in the last sentence of Luke 22:19).

Matthew
	English: Douay-Rheims	Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
	Matthew 26
26.	And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body.	εσθιοντων δε αυτων λαβων ο ιησους τον αρτον και ευχαριστησας εκλασεν και εδιδου τοις μαθηταις και ειπεν λαβετε φαγετε τουτο εστιν το σωμα μου
Mark
	English: Douay-Rheims	Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
	Mark 14
22.	And whilst they were eating, Jesus took bread; and blessing, broke, and gave to them, and said: Take ye. This is my body.	και εσθιοντων αυτων λαβων ο ιησους αρτον ευλογησας εκλασεν και εδωκεν αυτοις και ειπεν λαβετε φαγετε τουτο εστιν το σωμα μου
Luke
	English: Douay-Rheims	Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
	Luke 22
19.	And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me.	και λαβων αρτον ευχαριστησας εκλασεν και εδωκεν αυτοις λεγων τουτο εστιν το σωμα μου το υπερ υμων διδομενον τουτο ποιειτε εις την εμην αναμνησιν

[MarkBsnr]

Why do Protestants wave their hands in the air like those Khalimar worshipers in "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom"? Are they making sure God "sees" them? Trying to get his attention?

Well, when you make it all up as you go along and invent your daily beliefs before you get breakfast, you'd want to get somebody's attention. And, when you have to make it all up, very often you simply get it wrong and just as often, ludicrously wrong...

[annalex]

eis should read esti or estin.

But you also say:

And that is the sense “eis” is used elsewhere in the Gospels, as symbolizes, etc.

Please show me where "estin" is properly translated "symbolizes".

I just went through a dozen occurences of "estin" off the top and in all of them "symbolizes" would be impossible to substitute.

Matthew
	Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)	English: Douay-Rheims
	Matthew 1
20.	ταυτα δε αυτου ενθυμηθεντος ιδου αγγελος κυριου κατ οναρ εφανη αυτω λεγων ιωσηφ υιος δαυιδ μη φοβηθης παραλαβειν μαριαμ την γυναικα σου το γαρ εν αυτη γεννηθεν εκ πνευματος εστιν αγιου	But while he thought on these things, behold the angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost.
23.	ιδου η παρθενος εν γαστρι εξει και τεξεται υιον και καλεσουσιν το ονομα αυτου εμμανουηλ ο εστιν μεθερμηνευομενον μεθ ημων ο θεος	Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
	Matthew 2
2.	λεγοντες που εστιν ο τεχθεις βασιλευς των ιουδαιων ειδομεν γαρ αυτου τον αστερα εν τη ανατολη και ηλθομεν προσκυνησαι αυτω	Saying, Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to adore him.
	Matthew 3
3.	ουτος γαρ εστιν ο ρηθεις υπο ησαιου του προφητου λεγοντος φωνη βοωντος εν τη ερημω ετοιμασατε την οδον κυριου ευθειας ποιειτε τας τριβους αυτου	For this is he that was spoken of by Isaias the prophet, saying: A voice of one crying in the desert, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.
11.	εγω μεν βαπτιζω υμας εν υδατι εις μετανοιαν ο δε οπισω μου ερχομενος ισχυροτερος μου εστιν ου ουκ ειμι ικανος τα υποδηματα βαστασαι αυτος υμας βαπτισει εν πνευματι αγιω	I indeed baptize you in the water unto penance, but he that shall come after me, is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire.
15.	αποκριθεις δε ο ιησους ειπεν προς αυτον αφες αρτι ουτως γαρ πρεπον εστιν ημιν πληρωσαι πασαν δικαιοσυνην τοτε αφιησιν αυτον	And Jesus answering, said to him: Suffer it to be so now. For so it becometh us to fulfill all justice. Then he suffered him.
17.	και ιδου φωνη εκ των ουρανων λεγουσα ουτος εστιν ο υιος μου ο αγαπητος εν ω ευδοκησα	And behold a voice from heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
	Matthew 5
3.	μακαριοι οι πτωχοι τω πνευματι οτι αυτων εστιν η βασιλεια των ουρανων	Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
10.	μακαριοι οι δεδιωγμενοι ενεκεν δικαιοσυνης οτι αυτων εστιν η βασιλεια των ουρανων	Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
34.	εγω δε λεγω υμιν μη ομοσαι ολως μητε εν τω ουρανω οτι θρονος εστιν του θεου	But I say to you not to swear at all, neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God:
35.	μητε εν τη γη οτι υποποδιον εστιν των ποδων αυτου μητε εις ιεροσολυμα οτι πολις εστιν του μεγαλου βασιλεως	Nor by the earth, for it is his footstool: nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king:

"that which is conceived in her, symbolizes of the Holy Ghost"?

[MarkBsnr]

The development of the Christian liturgy did not come out of nowhere. The Church Fathers were aprt of the same cultural and linguistic makeup that wrote the New Testament and it is precisely form them that we have the evolution of liturgical traditions in the early catholic Church, which are still observed by the East.

Excellent post; the Tridentine Mass would fit into your description; the NO Mass is being massaged in the same way that the NT was massaged, to fit the beliefs of the Church, and not vice versa, as the liberals desperately wanted.

[esquirette]

This should cover all the bases for you. It is New Testament. It is God speaking. It addresses the eternal nature of God. Its book begins as ‘The Revelation of Jesus Christ.’ Its context is judgment.

“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” Revelation 1:8

[MarkBsnr]

kosta: Why do Protestants wave their hands in the air like those Khalimar worshipers in "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom"? Are they making sure God "sees" them? Trying to get his attention?

metmom: I don't know. You'll have to ask them [sic].

And you are not Protestant?

It's called mob emotion and it happens in every rally that every greasy tent preacher with something to sell with shills in the audience does his best to ensure has happened. It happened with such as Mussolini and Hitler and Lenin who were trying to get people to give them power. It happened with such as Jim Jones and Joseph Smith and Rex Humbard who were after people's souls - and money. It happens all the time and it is a substitution for reason or belief.

That is why the Liturgy is reverent. We do not permit mob emotion - it is a detraction from the worship of Almighty God, not a requirement.

And we see over and over the appeal to Paul over Christ. The old heresies that we stamped out 1700 years ago have retaken root and are flourishing in the children of the Reformation.

[MarkBsnr]

As for its treatment of various parts of the Bible, the Catholic is based on the Gospels (not on Paul, as some claim), and the Gospels are the only scripture sitting on the altar. When Pauline Epistles are read, it is read by laymen, and the congregation sits. When the Gospels are read, they are read by ordained individuals (deacons, priests, bishops), and the congregation stands.

Correct. On Christmas Day, I had the honour of reading both the first and second readings (Isaiah and Paul). The congregation sat. I am a simple layman. The Gospel was read by our permanent deacon after being blessed by our priest and the entire congregation stood. Before the reading of the Gospel, the entire congregation crosses their forehead, lips and heart and prays that God will be ever in their mind, on their lips and in their heart. That does not happen before the letters of men are read.

[beezdotcom]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Charismatic_Renewal

Carry on.

[count-your-change]

What’s the difference between “conceived” and “cleansed”?

If you say timing...then timing of what?

[MarkBsnr]

Carry on.

I do not take or eschew action at your bidding. However, I appreciate the link and would point out that nowhere does this article indicate mob emotion.

[metmom]

Let me see if I understand this right.

If Catholics have charismatic services, it’s not *mob emotion* (post 6,459).

But if Protestants have charismatic services, it is (post 6,455).

So, it all depends on who’s holding the services whether the charismatic service is *mob emotion* or not.

Right?