The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

When do RC's believe that we (believers) receive the Holy Spirit? The Bible makes it clear that it is received when we believe the gospel and are made new creatures. It also states the the Holy Spirit indwelling the beleiver is a seal (sign), that is a down payment and a guarantee of the salvation (eternal life) that is to come after our natural death. Now, if you can lose your salvation, then show me in the NT where it states that God takes back this guarantee. Your beliefs make God a liar, and for lack of a better term, an Indian giver. Any "obedience" that is required for salvation is technically works and also makes God's word incorrect. True obedience, comes from love and gratitude and is a response to God's grace, and is indeed apparent in any believer, but is God working in us after we become new creatures, not a requirement of salvation. The RC's real problem with this and why they can't accept it, is because there is not a time they can truly say "I am saved and will go to heaven", no security and that is not what God's word teaches either. These RC problems and contradictions with Scripture are never adequately explained and confronted and is proof that, when pushed to the wall with questions, Roman Catholic theology is works based and not faith based (no matter how much they deny it).

... Those living "in grace" do not fear being judged because they are assured that all they do is seen as the Righteousness of Christ.

Thanks, Dave. Your explanation was clear and concise, as usual. The truth of the last statement from your reply (in italics, above) varies to one degree or another among protestants. For instance, I don't believe that God sees everything I do as the righteousness of Christ (I've not seen the scriptural support for that view). No, God sees me sin; that is why He has to correct and discipline me...that it might result in holiness (see Heb. 12); however, even though my behavior is lacking somewhat : ), I can say with assurance, based on Romans 5&8 (as well as the chapters between), that because of the death of Christ, I have been acquitted (justified) and given a life sentence---of LIFE, that is!!---there is, therefore, now no condemnation for those who are IN Christ Jesus!!! (and I am "in" Christ Jesus because the Holy Spirit baptized me into Christ ((Rom. 6: 3-6)).

Good morning, Becky. I'd like to take a moment to thank you for making me think yesterday about something that I hadn't given much thought ... the Body of Christ. You see, I grew up under the impression that since God created us in His own image, then we must all be part of the Body.
Thanks to our conversation, I thought, read and prayed more about this and I can only say that I was wrong.
The Body of Christ = the church The church = believers Believers, therefore = the Body of Christ

Blushing in my humility, I stand corrected.

Thanks for the honesty to admit your error, but how long have you been on these threads? How could you NOT have seen this before? Were these RC's that taught you that everyone is a child of God? You should have also realized this by reading the Scriptures, Jesus and the apostles taught clearly that some are adopted as children of God and some are not.

Sort of a "shepherds are selected by the sheep" theory, eh? Sounds great for modern Protestantism and for the ideal of democracy. Vote on who should be the shepherds, and what doctrines are to be believed. I've seen how this works in the Episcopal Church. It works about the same in most other Protestant denominations. Isn't democracy wonderful?

Jn 10:11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

Let me see, are you saying the pope is the shepherd?
Sorry, no one votes whether or not Christ will be the Shepherd, and it is plain that you have placed the pope in a position only Christ fills.

It works about the same in most other Protestant denominations. Isn't democracy wonderful?

It certainly is, and when we stand before God, we will take full responsibilities for our mistakes, but I wonder how it's going to go over when you say, But, but, but, the Church told us what to believe, it's not my fault if they were wrong.

Gal 6:4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. V-5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

When you say "3 years of attending Mass" to hear all the scriptures, you must mean DAILY mass; is that correct? Does the priest read long portions of scripture at mass? Is every priest on the same schedule of scripture reading throughout the U.S. or world? How long does mass last each day?

No, during the three year cycle of Sunday Mass readings most if not all of the New Testament will be proclaimed. (Daily readings are on a two year cycle.)

In the first half of the Mass, called the Liturgy of the Word, there is first a reading from the Old Testament. Then a Psalm for the day is read or sung (or a similarly themed Psalm is sung). Then a reading is taken from one of the Epistles. These two readings are done by lay people assigned as ministers to speak the Word. The Psalm is usually sung (and lead) by a lay person known as a Cantor.

The Priest then reads a reading from one of the Gospels. Then the priest gives a Homily to relate the teachings to the people and to explain them. All of the readings relate to each other, often with the OT reading foreshadowing something Christ fulfills, or telling a story which Christ refers to in the Gospel.

The entire Church worldwide follows the same Calendar (to know what each day is to mean, whether it be Christmas or the feast of St. Anthony Mary Claret (today)) and the same cycle of readings. That is, every Catholic Church will read and expound upon the same readings every day. If I were in Japan and had my Lectionary (book of readings) with me I could know exactly what readings were being proclaimed even though I don't speak Japanese.

The daily readings that al_c posts, along with a reflection on them are exactly that: THE Daily Readings for the Church.

A daily Mass may last 30 minutes, a Sunday Mass typically one hour.

Don't you think that it is kind of unfair to condemn those who rely on Scripture as their only authority, by using the most far out example to say that is where everyone who uses Scripture alone will wind up?

It would be unfair if I said that. But I didn't. I said that there is nothing in the concept of Sola Scriptura to stop this guy from thinking that there are two gods IF that is what the "Holy Spirit" tells him in his private reading.

If you want to hold your personal understanding of what Scripture means, as helped along by the HS, as the final authority then you have to accept what happens to those who are confused.

Has no one in the 1,700-year history of the Catholic Church ever taken your traditions out of context (proof-texting them, if you will) to come up with some unorthodox ideas?

Of course. And we teach that people who claim an understanding which does not align with the teaching of the Church are wrong. Period. We don't claim that each person, with the help of the "Holy Spirit" is to be his own judge.

yeah, al_c I was getting a little hot-headed there and for that I apologize. I'm glad you sought God and searched the Scriptures on the issue of the body of Christ, and not solely relying on what I or anyone else says. It's a sign of maturity, something I still need work on, and I would encourage anyone to do the same when faced with these type questions.

I also seem to think we agree on this issue of the blood of Christ. We both agree that the grace is available to all. Of that I am in complete agreement. Christ died on the cross for all. He died while we were sinners. Everyone has the opportunity to recieve this free gift, but only those who choose to accept will reap the benefits of that gift. Where we disagree is on the issue of those who have not heard the message of Christ. I say that all have heard and have no excuse and that is where we differ. I apologize once again for the aggressive and snotty tone I took yesterday, and look forward to further discussions.

JM

Let me re-phrase that. Not everything one does is seen as righteousness. But only righteousness is attributed to you, because of Christ.

No, God sees me sin; that is why He has to correct and discipline me...that it might result in holiness (see Heb. 12); however, even though my behavior is lacking somewhat : ), I can say with assurance, based on Romans 5&8 (as well as the chapters between), that because of the death of Christ, I have been acquitted (justified) and given a life sentence---of LIFE, that is!!---there is, therefore, now no condemnation for those who are IN Christ Jesus!!! (and I am "in" Christ Jesus because the Holy Spirit baptized me into Christ ((Rom. 6: 3-6)).

I know you don't mean this to the exclusion of other aspects, but it is the peculiar Protestant fascination with being "acquitted" that drives the entire worldview. By the time I get to Heaven I will be actually innocent, not just acquitted. In the western Church it is seen as an inward transformation, by the power of Christ, that makes me actually pure and free from sin. Not to be "covered" by the righteousness of Christ, but to be changed. Our eastern friends talk of a healing. Sin is a sickness in our souls and Christ is the antibiotic which heals us. Actually heals us.

Hi, JH! Thanks for your reply about "willful" and "unwillful" sin.

I smoked a pipe for 35 years, and I had quit probably 100 times, but I could never stay quit for long, then one day I said, this isn't fair to my wife, not only the smoke she was exposed to, but if I were to die from it, and leave her alone with the thought that,.. if only he hadn't been so selfish, he would still be here. I prayed for help, and I quit that day, and I had no withdrawal problems or temptations to start again, and I didn't even throw out all my pipes or tobacco until years later. It was so easy, I knew God had given me a miracle and I thank him to this day. I sometimes think though, I probably won't be credited with overcoming this, because I didn't have anything to do with it. (^g^)

WOW---I had a very similar experience---in fact, almost a carbon copy! The Lord is awesome, isn't He? (I started to say the Lord is powerful, and then I remembered that "even the weakness of God is stronger than men"!!!!!!)

Johnny, I'm following what you're saying in your discussion with allend and SD. A big part of the problem is semantics....and the sequence of events. You and I believe that to have eternal life we must receive, in faith, Christ as Lord and Saviour (Jn. 1:12 & 3:14-16 for example). We are adopted as sons...permanently. Our obedience (works) justify our claim to be His children. If there are no works to justify our claim, then our claim is hollow and we only possess "dead faith."

If I have learned from these Catholics correctly (they'll set me straight if I've got it wrong), the sequence for them is different. They "believe" in Christ, but that doesn't guarantee them eternal life/salvation. Their salvation is a work in progress...the works they engage in are progressively "saving" them. They don't know for certain that they have eternal life until they reach the end and God judges them....and the more I write, the more I feel that I have their view down all wrong....Somebody help me out here!

Yes, I know it seems real basic, but I guess I've never given a whole lot of thought to that detail. How long have you been on these threads? I know you've been here long enough to know that I was brought up in a protestant church. And it's not a matter of being taught wrong, it's a matter of my own incorrect opinion on who or what makes up the Body of Christ.

But you bring up a different point ... how can you say we are not all God's children? Yes, we are His children as He created us. We, however, have a choice whether or not we become a part of the Body. There is a difference (see my above admittance of my mistaken understanding).

It would be unfair if I said that. But I didn't.

Then I am sorry for implying a meaning that you never intended.

I said that there is nothing in the concept of Sola Scriptura to stop this guy from thinking that there are two gods IF that is what the "Holy Spirit" tells him in his private reading.

But there is, it is called context. If you think a particular portion of Scripture says something that clearly contradicts another portion, than your understanding is wrong.

If you want to hold your personal understanding of what Scripture means, as helped along by the HS, as the final authority then you have to accept what happens to those who are confused.

I don't hold my personal understanding as authoritative. I hold Scripture as authoritative. If my understanding conflicts with Scripture than I need to rethink my understanding.

Has no one in the 1,700-year history of the Catholic Church ever taken your traditions out of context (proof-texting them, if you will) to come up with some unorthodox ideas?

Of course. And we teach that people who claim an understanding which does not align with the teaching of the Church are wrong. Period. We don't claim that each person, with the help of the "Holy Spirit" is to be his own judge.

Any of the Sola Scriptura people that I know would point out that the "Two Gods" doctrine is clearly wrong. Period.

By your own admission people have taken Catholic Tradition out of context. Does that make you see your Tradition as suspect, and want to throw the whole thing out? Well, just because some people might take Scripture out of context and twist it does not make me want to throw out Sola Scriptura as my approach to doctrine.

-ksen

I also seem to think we agree on this issue of the blood of Christ. We both agree that the grace is available to all. Of that I am in complete agreement. Christ died on the cross for all. He died while we were sinners.

Agreed.

Everyone has the opportunity to recieve this free gift, but only those who choose to accept will reap the benefits of that gift.Where we disagree is on the issue of those who have not heard the message of Christ.

It is kind of a gray area. You have posted scripture that supports that. I have posted scriptue that supports everyone being coverd by His blood. Interesting. I'll study this further and I hope you'll do the same.

I say that all have heard and have no excuse and that is where we differ.

True, God does reveal His glory through the things of this remarkable creation we call earth. But I think that His mercy toward His creation (us) is beyond our understanding and I think when we get there, we'll be quite surprised to see who's in Heaven and who is not.

I apologize once again for the aggressive and snotty tone I took yesterday,

No worries.

and look forward to further discussions.

As do I. How else are we going to learn?

God bless.

WOW. I don't see how y'all squeeze all that into a half-hour or an hour. You didn't mention eucharist...they don't do that each day at mass?

I can help out with this one. I try to go to Mass every morning. Rarely do I let something interfere with that kick-start for my day (not trying to gloat here, just offering a personal account of a daily Mass). The daily Mass is not required, so there are a lot fewer people there. Also, there's little or no singing (at least in my parish). We still do the readings ... one from the Old Testament (usually. Can be from NT), one Psalm, and then the Gospel. Sunday's have 4 readings (usually one OT, one NT, Psalm and Gospel). We still get a homily and the Eurcharist. With the lack of singing and the fact that there aren't a lot of people in line for the Eurcharist, the daily Mass is usually over in about half an hour.

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.