Posted on 10/22/2011 1:21:35 PM PDT by NYer
Yes, but for those already sanctified there is nothing for them to burn off. There is a test and they pass the test. They do nto go through purification.
2. The wood, hay and stubble are burned up and the person "loses" rewards BUT still goes to Heaven.
Those in purgatory lose the immediate union with Christ and the associated reward for life time sanctity BUT still go to Heaven.
3. What remains, gold, silver, precious gems, after the fire result in rewards IN ADDITION TO Heaven.
Yes. The Church teaches that there are levels of sanctity in Heaven too. These are the rewards among the saved.
what do the gold, silver, precious gems represent?
They are rewards for righteousness, such as virginity, dedication to others, poverty, fortitude, works of mercy and justice, etc.
cannot be good works that get them into Heaven since it is by grace we are saved through faith without works
That is the foundational lie of Protestantism, and the reason Protestant propagandists would lie about this passage from their last bunker. We are saved through grace alone by both faith given us by the Father and works prepared for us by the Lord (Eph. 2:5-10)
We are saved through grace alone by both faith given us by the Father and works prepared for us by the Lord (Eph. 2:5-10)
How about this formulation?
We are savedI take "by" to signify (in this case) an intermediate agent,and "through" to suggest not some much agency as, um, itinerary.throughby grace alone, both bybothfaith given us by the Father and through works prepared for us by the Lord.
I'll try to get back on later for feedback.
The very start of the Reformation was initiated when William Tyndale and others translated the scriptures from the original languages and found profound differences from the Catholic version in Latin. To this day the Catholics are “encouraged” to use a “Catholic version” of scripture. The “traditional Catholic version” of the ten commandments that is listed many places for all to see excludes much or all of the second commandment and most all of us know it.
Throughout these threads I have noted multiple differences in the “Catholic version” of scripture. Some were subtle word changes; some were blatant errors from the original language. I was using the example of the Ten Commandments as one illustration of how the scriptures have been manipulated by the RCC. All of us know that the Catholic Church has not in years past encouraged personal ownership of the written word. Much of it was prior to the availability of the printed word which only increases the responsibility of the “Church” to be true and faithful to the original language of scripture which it wasn’t. That was graphically illustrated when Tyndale and others began to translate from the original language and found those differences and errors.
You can call the “Tradition version” of the Catholic Ten Commandments truncated, a perversion, a travesty, or whatever you want but it stands that most if not all of the published “Catholic version” of the Ten Commandments differs from scripture. That is the travesty.
You can insinuate “pornography” or attempt to obfuscate by referencing and insinuating that we get our information from cultic sites all you want. It still remains that “official” Catholic sites point to the differences and can be easily referenced for those who seek truth.
Your version of harsh doesn’t even come close to the harsh that those who have been misled by the RCC by the “Catholic version” of scriptures and their teachings. I’ll simply close by using the words of scripture in Revelation. “Come out of her”.
There are non so blind as those who will not see.
I am so darn sorry!
When one sees something this foul on the sidewalk it is best to simply step around it and keep going. There are so many falsehoods in this one posting that lies have nearly reached critical mass.
Eek! It’s all over the bottom of my shoe!
Mind reading and false -- obviously
Where is your citation for what you offered as "The Catholic ten commandments"?
On what basis EXACTLY do you claim that the version you posted is "THE>Catholic version?
You can, if you like, say what the conversation was about. that does not concern me,. In your effort to make a point, you said something that struck me as not only false but embarrassingly false. I was going to ignore it, but smvoice taunted us with not responding to that particular point. SO I responded to that particular point.I was using the example of the Ten Commandments as one illustration of how the scriptures have been manipulated by the RCC.
And the point is false, as I showed from quoting both versions of the Decalogue as translated in the NAB, the copyright to which is owned, I am told, by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops who require us to use it in our Masses -- so it don't get much more Catholic than that.
I do know that as a boy in the Episcopal Church I was not asked to memorize both the Deuteronomy and the Exodus versions of the Decalogue, but shortened version.
Also if you read the links I provided in answer to smvoice, you will see that our way of numbering seems to have started with Augustine, a man much loved of reform Christians, and is used by many Lutherans.
So whatever the large history of Catholics and the Bible is, this particular point you made was false. And that's all I was addressing.
As it happens, I do think there is a legitimate comparison between,on the one hand, the damaging effect of pornography and the damaging effect of the kind of fascination with the purported evil of Catholics that one sees often on FR. I insinuated nothing. I made an analogy.
Obviously.
Well, I’m sorrier. So there.
“We’re looking a little ridiculous”
True. A dissembled assembly of believers.
There are the “let me teach you/preach to you” ones.
There are the “man-the-torpedoes-full speed ahead” ones
There are the “my Scripture is better than your Scripture” ones
There are the “I’m in the basement searching the archives” ones
There are the “longer is better” ones
There are the “little quick darts at the target” ones
There are even the “I’m above the fray “ ones
And the whole darn thing gets to be like a religious Rubik’s Cube
It’s as if we have forgotten Philippians 3:14
or 1Peter 2:17
or Jeremiah 29:13
Or hundreds of other beautiful words from God to us in Scripture—not to be used as defense weapons but rather as lamps for our journey.
I sometimes withdraw from this site for a while because it helps me to re-focus on the one thing necessary—life on high with Christ Jesus.
I know so well that He needs no words from me—not even these I’m now writing. Rather, He yearns for my whole life to be given over to Him moment by precious moment in time. (”I thirst”)
It’s not that a forum like this has no value, because it does. It’s just that sometimes it gets to be like a run-away horse and could use a little reining-in.
It's important to remember that many of our antagonists have been fed a pack of falsehoods, lightly seasoned with truth. They have grown up and grown strong on all this stuff. It is a HUGE change in world-view and in habits of mind even only to entertain provisionally that there might be something to what we say.
I've been there.
One reads the passage like a hound, sniffing for any matter out of which one might spin a charge of Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism, and finding something which MIGHT be so spun, they pounce and shake it like the rat they think it is.
After all, if it were true that we corrupt the Gospel as they say we do, that would be a very bad thing, so bad that lacking faith in God, one might also throw reason, prudence, courtesy, and thoughtfulness overboard in one's haste and urgency.
So our job is to be patient and truthful, as God gives us the grace to be so.
"The Lord will fight for you, and you have only to be still." Ex 14:14
This “official” enough for you?
http://www.roman-catholic-catechism.com/catholic-ten-commandments.html
>> So whatever the large history of Catholics and the Bible is, this particular point you made was false.<<
No, it’s not false as I illustrate in the above referenced site. Your “shortened version” stands as evidence of the subtle yet effective method the RC uses. They try to cover themselves now that the Bible has been made so readily available but it stands that they have “traditionally” attempted to hide or at least deemphasize parts of the Ten Commandments. Your comment about memorizing the “shortened version” would also illustrate.
I don’t care “who started it” or who uses it. Eliminating or attempts to minimize sections of scripture is tantamount to deceit.
Pointing to differences between Catholic teaching and scripture is not damaging to anyone other then Catholic teaching.
Thank you.
And a blessed Feast of Simon and Jude to you!
You win. I agree. ;-D
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
How about you show with evidence just what part are “lies” rather then just making baseless accusations? Why don’t you start with why exactly the Reformers disagreed with the RC. Your “on the sidewalk” comments may have worked well in third grade but doesn’t rise to the level of intelligent debate by any means.
Well, it does sort of make all y'all look a little silly, too, so that's helpful.
I did neglect to insert the word “should” and I will attempt to be more diligent in the future for sure.
Unlike the practice (dare I say "tradition") on the Forum, I used the word lie to describe the content, not the motivation. Lying, as defined by St. Thomas Aquinas, is a statement at variance with the mind. That definition applies equally to the teller and the audience. A lie, whether representing something that is false as true or something that is true as false, is simply a falsehood. It is not necessary that one has to know something to be false for it to be a lie.
Pointing out divergence from scripture is silly? Hmmm!
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.