Posted on 10/18/2019 3:39:19 AM PDT by ealgeone
Examples of faith with works. Certainly didn’t provide evidence that Luther was right.
Read James 2
So. You can quote the scripture, but miss the point that God does not does not judge on what our hearts deserve, but what our works deserve.
Again, many follow man’s truth and not God’s truth.
Actually, He said this...continuing to illustrate the need to go to the Scriptures in dealing with the Roman Catholic:
Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you. Ex 20:12 NASB
The intent of this passage was to honor your earthly father and mother. Notice the words are not in caps as you did. Even the official Bible of Roman Catholicism doesn't put them in caps.
the Blessed Mother is our spiritual mother and the Mother of God.
And again the need for context.
Here is what Luke actually recorded.
48“For He has had regard for the humble state of His bondslave; For behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed. Luke 1:48 NASB
Will count in the Greek is a verb. It is NOT a title as Roman Catholicism tries to falsley claim. We honor her and pray to her and all the holy ones. Ephesians 6:18
Scripture never records Mary as being the "mother of God". That only came about in 431 at the Council of Ephesus where they were debating the nature of Christ. The resulting "mother of God" from that Council was to give clarity to the nature of Christ....not to honor Mary as Rome has wrongly asserted.
Mary is not our "spiritual mother".
Roman Catholics try to claim Jesus gave Mary to everyone based on John 19:27.
However, if Rome's priests studied the Greek they'd know this is not the case.
The Greek word used here for own is ἴδια. It conveys the following meaning:
2398 ídios (a primitive word, NAS dictionary) – properly, uniquely one's own, peculiar to the individual. 2398 /ídios ("uniquely one's own") is "stronger than the simple possessive pronoun ('own'). This emphatic adjective means 'private, personal' " (WS, 222).
This was a private matter. Mary was placed in John's care. Nothing more. Nothing less.
To attempt to read back into the passage something else is eisegesis.
As far as Mary helping Jesus in our salvation.
Again...no.
Only He was beaten.
Only He was cursed.
Only He wore a crown of thorns.
Only He was crucified.
Only He was resurrected.
Only Jesus.
17“For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. 18“No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.” John 10:17-18 NASB
******
We honor her and pray to her and all the holy ones. Ephesians 6:18
And again context is key here. In the passage dealing with spiritual warfare in Ephesians 6:10-20, Paul begins the section as follows:
10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might.
In these verses the emphasis is on relying upon God in spiritual warefar.
The verse you cited, 6:18 is this.... With all prayer and petition pray at all times in the Spirit, and with this in view, be on the alert with all perseverance and petition for all the saints,
No where in this passage is Paul suggesting we pray TO anyone other than God.
In fact, no where in the NT are we ever given instruction to pray to anyone other than to God. Though I will give you credit for being honest in saying Roman Catholics pray TO Mary....something many of your fellow RCs have denied on these forums.
When Jesus was in the Garden, did He seek out Mary for council? Nope.
He went to the Father.
1Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You, 2even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life. 3“This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 4“I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do. 5“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. John 17:1-5
Just before this He told the disciples the following:
23“In that day you will not question Me about anything. Truly, truly, I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything in My name, He will give it to you. John 16:23
Again, Jesus points to the Father in matters of prayer.
The false writings I posted from Roman Catholic writers previously stands in contradiction of the words of the Son....that is the writings of the Roman Catholics writers are false...as is your assertion as to whom we are to pray to and who is our advocate.
When the disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray....what did He teach them? The consecration prayer to Mary?
Nope.
The Hail Mary? Nope.
He taught them this:
9“Pray, then, in this way: ‘Our Father who is in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. 10‘Your kingdom come. Your will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. 11‘Give us this day our daily bread. 12‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. 13‘And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’] 14“For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15“But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions. Matt 6:9-15
All prayer is directed to the Creator....not the created.
Scripture is clear on this.
********
The Blessed Mother without sin is closer to God than the rest of us and helped Jesus in our salvation.
Nope.
You think proximity matters in terms of how God hears us?
Again, this shows a lack of understanding of exactly what He has done for us. Paul notes:
13For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, 14in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. Colossians 1:13-14
As far as Mary being sinless....well, we've about beat that one so much I won't go into detail but suffice to say the Roman Catholic position contradicts both Old and New Testaments but also violates its own "unanimous consent" among the ECFs as there is NO unanimous consent on this issue among the ECFs.
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23
When they sin against You--for there is no one who does not sin--and You become angry with them and deliver them to an enemy who takes them as captives to his own land, whether far or near, 1 Kings 8:46
Surely there is no righteous man on earth who does good and never sins. Ecclesiastes 7:20
******
Jesus is our judge, and the Blessed Mother is our advocate who pleads our cause.
Wow. The blasphemy against the Son and Spirit is unbelievable. I really cannot believe you wrote this. You're a trained Roman Catholic priest....right?
The Holy Spirit is our Advocate as is Jesus.
The believer does not come under judgment in the sense of being judged for Heaven or Hell.
18“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:18 NASB
******
Christians can learn this from Mary (as they can others in the NT).
She was obedient to God. Luke 1:38
She knew the Scriptures. Luke 1:46-55
She recognized God as her Savior Luke 1:47
She gave praise to the Lord. Luke 1:46 She had faith in her Son. Jn 2:5
My friend, you've missed the point.
Again, many follow man’s truth and not God’s truth.
You just described Roman Catholicism in a nutshell.
Amen!
Many try to ignore or dispute the teachings of Jesus Christ as He directed His visible Catholic Church “Go therefore , and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” Matthew 28:19-20
Many have rejected or distorted some of the teachings of Jesus in the form of invisible churches without authority. So the protestant churches have many “individual or denominational interpretation of the teachings of Jesus versus an interpretation of an authoritative church based on two thousand years of unbroken developing biblical, apostolic, and patristic tradition and theology.” (Dave Armstrong)
May you be open to God’s truth and learn to accept it, whereas many at Capernaum (as have many today) rejected Jesus “I am the living bread that came down from Heaven, whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” Matthew 6:51
“Beloved, so not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see if they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” 1John 4:1
Yet Rome is guilty of the charge you level.
Prayers to Mary and other created beings.
Allowing believers to believe the words of apparitions promising the avoidance of the eternal fire if a piece of cloth is worn.
The false notion of purgatory.
The false claim that you must be baptized for salvation but when it's not available a non-biblical "baptism of desire" is created.
Having to Believe that it's a sin if you miss certain "holy days of obligation."
Having to believe that you must believe Mary was Immaculately conceived.
Having to believe that she was ever virgin.
Belief she was assumed into Heaven.
That during the Mass the priest calls Jesus down from Heaven to be re-sacrificed over and over again.
That undefined "sacred tradition" is equal to Scripture.
There are more errors in Rome. But these illustrate how far Rome has departed from the Scriptures.
Many have rejected or distorted some of the teachings of Jesus in the form of invisible churches without authority. So the protestant churches have many “individual or denominational interpretation of the teachings of Jesus versus an interpretation of an authoritative church based on two thousand years of unbroken developing biblical, apostolic, and patristic tradition and theology.” (Dave Armstrong)
2000 years of unbroken tradition?? LOL. That's comical. Rome has added so much to the New Testament it's practically unrecognizable today.
Roman Catholics like to charge Christian churches with with "individual or denominational interpretatioins" when some in their own denomination do not recognize the authority of the current pope.
Some reject any pope occurring after 1958. Do you?
When asked for the definitive teaching on various passages in the NT the Roman Catholic can only point to around 10-40 depending on the source. Imagine that....the claim of being the church for 2000 years and Rome has only dogmatically defined a handful of verses. You'd think after 2000 years they would have these explained by now.
May you be open to God’s truth and learn to accept it, whereas many at Capernaum (as have many today) rejected Jesus “I am the living bread that came down from Heaven, whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.” Matthew 6:51
There is no Matthew 6:51 in the NT. Perhaps you mean John 6:51?
Yet Rome continues to have the wrong emphasis on this passage.
The unbelieving Jews were the ones asserting the eating/drinking flesh and blood.
Jesus was talking about faith/belief in Him.
I have placed my trust in Christ.
I concur with Peter's answer.
67So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.” John 6:67-68
Luther’s actual last words:
https://www.wls.wels.net/rmdevser_wls/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ToppeDeathbed.pdf
The Smalcald Articles:
http://www.stpaulserie.org/The%20Smalcald%20Articles%20and%20the%20Treatise.pdf
“buying indulgences”
Do you actually know what the Church’s traditional teaching is regarding indulgences and how and indulgence works according to traditional Church teaching?
Yep. And I know it's not found in the New Testament.
“Yep. And I know it’s not found in the New Testament.”
1. So what if it isn’t found in the New Testament? Is it required to be found in the New Testament? If so, demonstrate by what authority it is.
2. You’ve misrepresented what the Church traditionally teaches about indulgences and how they are obtained. Or else clearly state what the Church teaches, so that Catholics may agree that you do know, before you assert that indulgences aren’t this or that.
1. So what if it isn’t found in the New Testament? Is it required to be found in the New Testament? If so, demonstrate by what authority it is.
The authority of God in that He gave the church His written word. The ECFs knew this and appealed to Scripture for what they believed to be "tradition".
IF Scripture is not the final authority then what is? The opinion of man?
IF Scripture is not the final authority then there is nothing to measure teachings against for accuracy. It was one of the primary reasons the early church put together the canon.
You’ve misrepresented what the Church traditionally teaches about indulgences and how they are obtained. Or else clearly state what the Church teaches, so that Catholics may agree that you do know, before you assert that indulgences aren’t this or that.
The Roman Catholic church was selling indulgences. That is history. You may not like it, but those are the facts.
Where in the New Testament is it written that a decision rendered by the Church must be found in the New Testament in order to be authoritative?
Scripture was written by man under God’s authority. You would like to artificially impose that no man has God’s authority (consistent with the concept of the abomination of desolation). According to you, only ink on paper has God’s authority. You thus put God in your (opinion of man - you being the man) box.
Besides, the New Testament states that Jesus did far more than was ever written down. Do you then presume to be innocent in assuming that the Church has passed nothing of those particular sacred teachings on?
Regarding selling indulgences, it is written that love covers a multitude of sins. Yet to a protestant it is not an act of charity to beautify a building dedicated to God’s glory and praise?
St. Peter’s First Letter, chapter 4, verse 8 says,
“But before all things have constant mutual charity among yourselves: for charity covereth a multitude of sins.”
No wonder the gathering places of the new church (Modern “Catholicism”) and that of Protestants (versus traditional Catholicism) tend to look more like a library or public school building than a place for the gathering of the faithful.
Yes. It is agreed Jesus did a whole bunch more...so much so that, per John, "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written." John 21:25 NASB
*****
Regarding selling indulgences, it is written that love covers a multitude of sins. Yet to a protestant it is not an act of charity to beautify a building dedicated to God’s glory and praise?
You're justifying the selling of indulgences to the poor to get their loved one's souls out of purgatory????
*****
No wonder the gathering places of the new church (Modern “Catholicism”) and that of Protestants (versus traditional Catholicism) tend to look more like a library or public school building than a place for the gathering of the faithful.
You do realize the early ekklesia met in people's houses....right? You were aware of that?? Right??
Brother, hate to break it to you....I see a multitude of opinions among Roman Catholics on just these threads.
Some say Francis is not a valid pope....do you say he's valid?
Some say there hasn't been a pope since 1958. Perhaps you're one of those?
Some say the RCC should only be pre-Vatican II...some say Vatican II is ok. What say you?
These are just the starters.
Can you point us to the dogmatic declarations of each verse in the New Testament?
Let's make this easy and just say give us the dogmatic rendering of each verse in Jude.
LOL....I know you can't. And you post this dribble in a foolish attempt to disparage non-Roman Catholics.
Might want to get that speck out of your eye.
I posted what the Roman Catholic church had authorized.
Depending on the time, the position has changed like much of Roman Catholicism.
The forgotten thesis #96. What me worry?
“... the selling of indulgences to the poor to get their loved one’s souls out of purgatory”
Indulgences are in a wide variety of forms. The poor have other means available besides the only one that you wish to discuss.
“You do realize the early ekklesia met in people’s houses....right? You were aware of that?? Right??”
What does that have to do with the beautiful structures that were also built for the faithful? Priests offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in peoples’ houses even today when necessary.
Indulgences are in a wide variety of forms. The poor have other means available besides the only one that you wish to discuss.
Indulgences are a non-biblical false teaching of Rome.
The blood of Christ either forgives the sin or it doesn't.
>> “You do realize the early ekklesia met in people’s houses....right? You were aware of that?? Right??”<<
What does that have to do with the beautiful structures that were also built for the faithful? Priests offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in peoples’ houses even today when necessary.
Those "beautiful" structures were built upon a false promise.
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.