Posted on 04/27/2021 5:25:46 AM PDT by Old Yeller
Rather, while the term "Protestant" is too ambiguous to be meaningful, distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).
You mean like Catholics who decide which modern Catholic teachings are valid based upon their judgment of ancient church teachings, versus basically obeying any public teaching of popes and councils?
"(”they wrestle with the scriptures to their own destruction!”) "
Distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).
" (”No prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation”)"
Which is an example of the very wresting of scripture that 2 Peter 3:16 condemns, for the text (2 Peter 1:20,21) you refer to is simply not referring to understanding Scripture, but is referring to prophecy not being the product of the prophets own understanding, since they themselves did not understand what they wrote, as comparing Scripture with Scripture attests: "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:11)
"Closely followed by once saved always saved."
Saving faith is only that which finally endures, and Scripture warns about falling away, (Gal 5:1-4; Heb. 3:12; 10:25-39) but easy believism is mostly what Rome promotes, as she manifestly considers even proabortion, prohomosexual public figures (Teddy K RCs) to be members in life and in death, while Scripture provides for presently knowing you possess eternal life. (1Jn. 5:13) And following the commandments (Math 19:17), preserving in good works (Rom 2:7), striving for holiness (Heb 12:14), praying in earnest (1 Tess 5:17), and fighting against the forces of evil (Eph 6:11), and the selfish demands of the flesh (Rom 8:13) describes faith, and is consistent with sola fide, as shown. In contrast to RC teaching on salvation via becoming actually good enough to enter Heaven via Purgatory.
". Two death nails. “The Church is the bulwark and pillar of all truth!”
Which is "wresting of scripture, for 1 Tim. 3:15 does not mean that the church is the ensured infallible judge of what is of God and the meaning of it, for in the Greek, "church living God pillar and ground the truth" - and with pillar and ground both basically meaning "support" - does not show us that that. Not only is the church that of the "living God" and not the dead institutional form that Catholicism overall is, but nowhere is the church presented as either the originating source of all Truth or the ensured infallible authority on it, but instead, Scripture provided the epistemological doctrinal and prophetic foundation for the NT church, which it is grounded in and supports, being the support "of the Truth."
"“The Church is ONE as Jesus and the Father are one!” The 39,000 Christian denominations are music to Satan’s ( who is the master of division) ears.
Neither Rome with her many divisions nor all the claimed 39,000 Christian denominations are the one true church, as instead the only one true church and to which Christ is married is the mystical body of Christ, into which the Spirit baptizes the convert. (1 Co. 12:13). For this body alone only and always consists of true believers, while the organic fellowships in which believers are to be part of end up being admixtures of wheat and chaff.
As a poster who_would_fardels_bear delineated:
so-called traditional Catholics have split themselves into almost as many sects as Protestants have. There are:
1. Church Militant who chastise the Bishops but not the Pope
2. The Wanderer supporters
3. The Remnant led by the brother of the publisher of The Wanderer who now disowns The Wanderer
4. The SSPX
5. Those that believe the SSPX is a valid Catholic organization but aren't members.
6. Those who believe the SSPX is in apostasy
7. Those former members of the SSPX that believe Fellay is too deferential to the Pope
8. Sedevacantists who believe Francis is the first anti-Pope or non-Pope
9. Sedevacantists who believe John XXIII was the first anti-pope or non-Pope and that the Second Vatican Council is invalid
10. Those that believe in various conspiracy theories that the Church is now completely controlled by: The Vatican Bank, Gays, Masons, Space Aliens, the Illuminati or some combination of the above
11. Various groups of reasonable Catholics who either quietly or on record disagree with the Pope but are unwilling to go all the way and call him a heretic
12. Various groups of reasonable Catholics who are willing to call the Pope a heretic but are also willing to wait for the process of replacement to unfold in an orderly manner
(NOTE: Church Militant may have changed its position recently to be more directly in opposition to the Pope but I haven't kept track.)
And as another poster wryly summed it,
The last time the church imposed its judgment in an authoritative manner on "areas of legitimate disagreement," the conservative Catholics became the Sedevacantists and the Society of St. Pius X, the moderate Catholics became the conservatives, the liberal Catholics became the moderates, and the folks who were excommunicated, silenced, refused Catholic burial, etc. became the liberals. The event that brought this shift was Vatican II; conservatives then couldn't handle having to actually obey the church on matters they were uncomfortable with, so they left. ” - Nathan, https://christopherblosser.wordpress.com/2005/05/16/fr-michael-orsi-on-different-levels-of-catholic-teaching (original http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/blog/2005/05/fr-michael-orsi-on-different-levels-of.html)
Thus we have, Is Catholicism about to break into three?
Archbishop Viganò: We Are Witnessing Creation of a ‘New Church ’
The SSPX's Relationship with Francis: Is it Traditional? post #6
Is the Catholic Church in De Facto Schism?
The Impossibility of Judging or Deposing a True Pope...If Francis is a true Pope …
"“Unless you eat me flesh and drink my blood you have no life in you. For my flesh is TRUE FOOD! "
More wresting of Scripture, as well as implicitly denying Lumen Gentium 16.
Due to the inability of Catholic priests to produce what a plainly literal reading of the words of consecration at the Last Supper would mean, then Catholicism has had to engage in an attempted complex metaphysical explanation to justify their quite non-literal understanding.
For what a plainly literal understanding of “Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you," (1 Corinthians 11:24) ) and "Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Matthew 26:27-28) would mean is that what the apostles consumed at the Last Supper was not that of non-existent inanimate objects that are said to be the “true body and blood” of Christ despite appearances and tests to the contrary, but would manifestly be the same manifest physical body and blood that proved Jesus Christ came in the flesh; That of the crucified body and shed blood of Christ which looked, smelled, behaved and would scientifically test as being real human flesh - and which Scripture emphasizes, and stands in contrast to a Docetist-type Christ whose appearance did not correspond to what He physically was.
“And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” (Luke 24:38-39) “Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.” (John 20:27) “And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.” (1 John 4:3)
(That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. (1 John 1:1; 5:6) , in contrast to a christ whose appearance did not correspond to what He physically was. (For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist: 2 John 7)
What this "true body and blood of Christ" would not be then is inanimate objects, bread and wine - which look, smell, behave and would scientifically test as being simply bread and wine - and yet in Catholic theology these no longer even exist when the priest utters the "words of consecration,” - the invisible yet true body and blood of Christ having taken their place. "The very body" "true and proper and lifegiving flesh and blood of Jesus Christ," whole and entire in His physical "reality,” "with His bodily organs and limb," His flesh being "corporeal, not spiritual" with the actual partaking being of Christ in person, hence literally,” yet not as "sensible, visible, tangible, or extended, although it is such in heaven," but under a "new mode of being," under the mere appearance of non-existent bread and wine, "in each particle and in each drop."
Until that is, the non-existent bread or wine manifest decay/corruption, at which point the Eucharistic Christ no longer locally exists under that mode either.
For this contrivance is actually what (Roman) Catholic Eucharistic theology teaches. [1]
In contrast to which is the metaphorical understanding which alone easily conflates with Scripture overall. And indeed, Jews were familiar with the abundant metaphorical use of language in the Hebrew Scriptures, including calling men “bread,” and water “blood,” and who were solemnly forbidden to consume blood. (Lev. 17:10,11)
And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Beth–lehem, which *is* by the gate! And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Beth–lehem, that *was* by the gate, and took *it*, and brought *it* to David: nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord. And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: *is not this* the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it. These things did these three mighty men. (2 Samuel 23:15-17)
Or where God clearly states that the Canaanites were “bread,”:
“Only rebel not ye against the LORD, neither fear ye the people of the land; for they are bread for us” (Num. 14:9 (Numbers 14:9 KJV 1900 - Only rebel not ye… | Biblia))
Thus the very first Christians would have understood “Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you,” (1 Corinthians 11:24) and “Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matthew 26:27-28) as metaphorical.
And therefore what we see in the only description in much detail of the Lords' supper in the inspired record of how the NT understood the gospels, is that the understanding of the Lord's supper was that of remembering and thus showing/declaring His death by sharing a meal with others who were bought by His sinless shed blood, thus showing union with Christ and each other as being "one bread," analogous to how pagans have fellowship with the objects of their worship and each other in their dedicatory feasts, which was not by physically consuming their flesh.
And with no clergy distinctively ordained as "hiereus ," as a distinctive class of sacerdotal men (priests) and charged with or shown conducting it as a primarily unique function as a offering for sin and feeding the flock thereby. Instead, for NT pastors- for whom the distinctive word for priests or high priest (“hiereus” or “archiereus") are never distinctively used, being called presbuteros (senior/elder) or episkopos (superintendent/overseer) referring to those in the same office, (Titus 1:5-7 cf. Acts 20:17,28) - preaching the word is the primary active function of pastors, (2Tim. 4:2) feeding the flock thereby.
For is the word of God that is referred to as spiritual food, as "milk" (1Cor. 3:2; 1Pt. 1:22) and "meat," (Heb. 5:12,14) and is said to nourish souls, (1Tim. 4:6) and build them up, (Acts 20:32) and thus the primary active function of pastors is to preach the word, (2Tim. 4:2) which is how they "feed the flock." (Acts 20:28; 1Pt. 5:2)
Footnotes
One is saved by effectual faith, and thus a believe is known by who He obeys, and to not pray or confess sins to God and to some degree, others) as commanded, then it is a mark of unbelief.
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (John 3:36)
"And being made perfect [in being tested in all points as we are, yet without sin), he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; (Hebrews 5:9)"
But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. (Hebrews 6:9-10)
Roman Catholic (the Eastern Orthodox tend to reject the Roman version) Purgatory is based upon a false premise, not only that there is a need for further atonement for some sins after death, but that justification is on the basis of actual righteousness, which is first attained via the act itself of baptism (and which for infants means without even having to repent and to believe on the Lord Jesus with all their heart, which is contrary to Acts 2:38; 8:36,37; 10:43–47- 15:7–9) effecting "infused” righteousness, for in RC theology one is formally justified by their own righteousness. (Catholic Encyclopedia>Sanctifying Grace)
However, since since the unholy sin nature remains, then after baptism unless the baptized is one of the very few who has become perfect in character in this life and dies in that state, then entering Heaven can only be attained by attaining perfection of character ("by grace") thru postmortem “purifying punishments” and sufferings, commencing at death, in order to be with God.
Actually those who most strongly esteem Scripture as the accurate and wholly God-inspired supreme authority testify to being far more unified in basic beliefs than those who Rome manifestly considers members in life and in death. But under the vast umbrella called Protestantism then perhaps only about half actually believe in the Bible.
And as a web site popular among "RadTrad" RCs who reject Vatican Two is https://novusordowatch.org/start-here/ sums up the RC situation,
In response to the phenomenon of the Vatican II revolution, there are three essential lines of thought that have been proposed as “solutions” to understanding the situation. This is not now the place or time to critique or justify any of them. For now, we want to just describe them: (1) despite appearances, nothing has really substantially changed, and any interpretation of Vatican II that arrives at the conclusion that there has been a substantial change must be incorrect; (2) we must oppose (resist) these substantial changes and stick to the traditional, age-old teaching instead and ignore the Vatican II novelties while recognizing, however, that the authorities in the Vatican are legitimate and genuine Roman Catholic authorities — we just cannot agree with them on these points; (3) because it is impossible for the Catholic Church to change substantially, and because Vatican II constitutes such an impossible substantial change, it is necessary to conclude that the authority which gave us Vatican II is not in fact the legitimate Catholic authority; that is to say, the “Popes” which gave us Vatican II are not true Popes, nor are their successors, who have implemented and expanded this new religion that has its roots in the council. In fact, the entire religion that now occupies the Vatican and the official structures of the Catholic Church throughout the world is false — it is not the Catholic religion at all, and its putative authorities are not Catholics but heretical usurpers. Thus we have articles such as Is Catholicism about to break into three? Pope Says he Prays U.S.-Led Schism Can Be Thwarted
Fair enough...
Stop digging Phil.
"Suckle," hardly, while the NT church holding on to much of what the Jews who rejected them believed is not ironic or inconsistent.
"This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart." Matthew 18:35. Matthew 18 gives Christians the understanding of forgiving others here on Earth, not some notion of purgatory as a way station on the path to Heaven.
Forgiveness of sins is solely through the death and blood of Christ, not through His death and blood PLUS some conjectured time in so-called purgatory. When Jesus died on the cross, he said, "It is finished" period. Not "I'm finished here but since my death wasn't enough to provide complete forgiveness of sins, thank you Father for providing sinners with Purgatory where they can spend time finishing the job." Purgatory is pure applesauce.
That is easy, and it is not Purgatory which is not to come, but the millennial reign of Christ (after the battle of Armageddon) of which Scripture speaks clearly, yet which Rome rejects! And during which there shall be forgiveness, since there are unconverted living in this world to come.
And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. (Revelation 5:9-10)
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (Revelation 20:4)
And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited. And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth. (Zechariah 14:11-12)
And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the Lord will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. (Zechariah 14:16-19)
Yes, but who here is preaching a church excepts Catholics? Thus you must own all them she manifestly considers members, or be a schismatic yourself.
Thus Luther was no maverick but had substantial RC support for his non-binding personal canon. Furthermore, the deuteros (incldg. 2 Mac. 12) does not teach Purgatory or most any of the distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels). .
This cannot refer to Purgatory due to the facts that,
1. The judgment event of 1Co. 3 is the judgment seat of Christ, with its giving of rewards and loss thereof, which does not occur until the Lords return and the believers resurrection. (1Cor. 3:8ff; 4:5; 2Tim. 4:1,8; Rev.11:18; Mt. 25:31-46; 1Pt. 1:7; 5:4) versus purgatory, which (typically prolonged) suffering commences at death in order to enable souls to enter Heaven.
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. (2 Corinthians 5:10)
I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; (2 Timothy 4:1)
Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing. (2 Timothy 4:8)The judgment of 1 Cor. 3:15 will reveal what manner of workmanship they were building church with, for “Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire,” and while saving faith is one that characteristically walks in the obedience of faith, (Heb. 5:9) believers may suffer loss of rewards due to their manner of workmanship.
The fire burns up the fake stones, which like the tares of Mt. 13:40 at the end, are represented here as wood, hay or stubble, while the precious stones with fire-tried faith (1Pt. 1:7) endure, and gain rewards for the instruments of their faithfulness. Thus Paul says to the Thessalonians, "For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming? " (1 Thess. 2:19; cf. Rv. 3:11) And to the Corinthians, “we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus.” 2Cor. 1:14) And to the Philippians, that being “my joy and crown, so stand fast in the Lord, my dearly beloved.” (Phil. 4:1)
2. Wherever NT Scripture manifestly deals with the next life location for believers, it is to be with the Lord . (Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; Heb, 12:22,23; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17) Not only did the penitent criminal go to "paradise" at death (Lk. 23:43; cf. 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 2:7) as did Stephen, (Acts 7:59) but so would Paul and co. be with the Lord once absent from the body (Phil. 1:23,24) - even though Paul told the Philippians that was he not “already perfect.” (Phil. 3:12). Likewise he stated to the Corinthians, "We [plural] are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord." (2 Corinthians 5:8) and so would every believer if the Lord returned in their lifetime: “to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1Thess. 4:17; 1Cor. 15:51ff - even though many believers were in need of greater holiness. (2Cor. 7:1)
Paul confessed he was not already practically perfect, (Phil. 3:12) but he earnestly desired to become as much in this life (to "know him, and the power of his resurrection, being made conformable unto his death" - Philippians 3:10) as he would via the resurrection, yet he knew that if he died before that then he would be with the Lord.
Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: (For we walk by faith, not by sight). We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. (2 Corinthians 5:6-8)
For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: (Philippians 1:21-23)
I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. (Philippians 3:14-15)
Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample. (Philippians 3:17)
For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. (Philippians 3:20-21)
3. And as expressed in that verse and others, the resurrection is the only transformative event the believer manifestly looks forward to after this life (Rm. 8:23; 2Co. 5:1-4; Phil 3:20,21; 1Jn. 3:2) — not purgatory, which suffering commences at death in order to enable souls to enter Heaven.
4. Furthermore, Scripture only reveals growth in grace and overcoming as being realized in this world, with its temptations and trials, (1 Peter 1:6-7; 1Jn.2:14; 5:4,5; Rv. 2.7,11,17,26; 3:5,12,21) where alternatives to submitting to God can be made (suffering itself does not make one mature) and thus it was here that the Lord Himself was made “perfect,” (Heb. 2:10) as in being “in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.” (Heb. 4:15)
Thus what Scripture teaches is that it is on earth that testing and overcoming takes place, and that the elect go to be with the Lord upon death, or at His return, whichever comes first, and then they are judged as to the manner of works, reflecting their faith, and rewarded or suffer loss of rewards.
While perfection of character in this life. Mt 5:48 is invoked in support of this perfection being needed to be with God (which in context refers to treating your enemy benevolently), yet this does not teach that the achievement of absolute moral perfection in this life is a perquisite for salvation, which idea requires redefining salvation as to mean progressing to a state of being just enough by moral perfection to be with the Lord, and that being absent from the body means present in purgatory, not with the Lord, contrary to what is expressly stated. And which is akin to placing one under the Law, (Gal. 3:10) versus justification by imputed righteousness (justifying the unGodly by faith: Rm. 4:5) appropriated by a faith, but a faith which effects holiness.
For while salvific faith is one which characteristically effects the “obedience of faith” toward its Object (which faith in any moral authority will do), and which is an overcoming kind of faith, (Rv. 2,3), and grows towards the maturity which is called perfection, (Col. 1:28; 4:12; Ja. 1:4; 3:2; 1Jn. 4:17) and which faith has “great recompense of reward,” (Heb. 10:35), yet Scripture states that believers (being of true faith) are presently saved (Titus 3:5), and positionally perfect (Heb. 10:14) and seated in Heaven. (Eph. 2:6) And thus Christ can dwell with them now - "Christ in you, the hope of glory (Col. 1:27) - and as shown, they can and will go to be with the Lord at death, or at the Lord's return.
Finally, this RC interpretation of 1Co. 3 is not one which is even officially taught by Rome as requiring assent, and is contradicted by the notes in the official RC Bible which notes state,
The text of ⇒ 1 Cor 3:15 has sometimes been used to support the notion of purgatory, though it does not envisage this. - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PZ8.HTM#$4AC
Salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone. There is not one morsel of righteousness in any of us descended from Adam, so we cannot even approach The Holy God, He has to do it all, reconciling us to Himself to the glory of Christ alone. But men don't want only God, they want to exchange some deeds they believe are due recompense, so they can shre Christ's glory for their works.
It is never our works, for God is righteous and we are not so we cannot do deeds of righteousness unless GOD FIRST reconciles us to Himself through Whom H sent for our redeeming ... by faith alone in Christ alone, not one scintilla of our deeds for we cannot do righteous deeds until He imputes Christ's righteousness to us.
Actually they had strong scholarly Catholic support for holding to the most ancient OT canon. Now however it is time for me to get some sleep!
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.