Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience
I just witnessed a couple of Orthodox posters get kicked off a "Catholic Caucus" thread. I thought, despite their differences, they had a mutual understanding that each sect was considered "Catholic". Are not the Orthodox considered Catholic? Why do the Romanists get to monopolize the term "Catholic"?
I consider myself to be Catholic being a part of the universal church of Christ. Why should one sect be able to use a universal concept to identify themselves in a caucus thread while other Christian denominations need to use specific qualifiers to identify themselves in a caucus thread?
Nope. Anyone can search your name and see your posts. You are a very nasty individual, and I wasn't talking only about your posts to me.
lol, lol
Open threads on the Religion Forum require a thick skin. Perhaps you would be more comfortable in an Ecumenical or Caucus thread.
Now you’re just playing games. I am done with you. Goodbye.
Do you not know of any?
the unregenerate lives and deaths of those baptized as infants
... or those baptized at any age who still fall pray to sin. Once you are born again, you can be dead again. No one is claiming that baptism alone ensures salvation in the end. It doesn't. It is a new birth; what one does with this new life is up to him. "There is a sin unto death" (1 John 5:16f).
It isn’t the physical washing that saves you
Who said it is? Both Ezekiel 36:24f and 1 Peter 3:21 (which I quoted to illustrate that very point that you are now making to contradict me!), and the close connection between baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost so clear from the Acts, indeed, explain the Catholic teaching, that water of baptism is an external sign of the grace conferred by the sacrament. If water is unavailable, baptism still happens, the baptism of martyrdom or the baptism of desire (see the Good Thief story, and also the fact that at least one catechumen of the Church, that is someone still preparing for baptism, was martyred and canonized saint).
The water of baptism doesn’t result in a new birth
You prove that by Acts 2:38? Good grief. The passage clearly teaches, by plain text, that the gift of the Holy Ghost is the result of baptism. And then faith comes with the Holy Ghost, called the giver of life for a reason.
Six of the first 7 chapters of John...would you like me to go on?
All you have shown is what no one disputes, that faith gives eternal life. But baptism is a necessary element of that faith (as are the good works). The living water promised the Samaritan woman, by the way, is a promise of baptism.
Jesus said water and spirit to a man who knew the scriptures
Yes. That is because baptismal water is indeed prefigured in the Jewish scriptures.
All bark and no bite, the little reservoir dog ran along to look for easier prey.
Whom did Mary murder?
The pride of a thousand stiff-necked anti-Catholic bigots?
"Volume 1" is the direct word of God. Catechism seems to babble on about "volume 1".
I'd rather take my orders from the word of God then man babbling on about the word of God.
I think various ones of the finger frothing cliques consider themselves to be
the omnniscient Pope’s on that score . . . at least in their own mirrors.
Talk about having a thin skin!! I call you nasty and you get all defensive!
Awwwwww, you can't provide scripture that tells us to pray to saints, so you insult instead.
How surprising.
Frankly I don't see how you get more plainer than that. And you don't need to be a professor to see it.
SOProcedure.
What a terrible nasty person that one is! I ask for scripture, he gives me insults!
If God tells us to pray to saints, heck, I will start this instant. I have yet to see ANY scripture that tells us to do so!
Sorry, Harley, but you do NOT get to define what others believe.
“There is only God’s will and there is man’s will.”
If God commands you to repent, and you do, you are doing God’s will.
“The scriptures teaches us that until we are saved we are bound by man’s will. We simply do not have a desire to do the will of God. The Son must set us free from this predicament.”
Hmmm...what does scripture teach? Let’s read!
“And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 16But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” 17So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” - Romans 10
“But they have not all obeyed the gospel.” So some have? Obeyed the Gospel? But that suggests we respond to God.
“For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”” - Romans 10
Did God mean For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in [me] will not be put to shame”, or did He mean “Everyone I give belief to will not be put to shame.”
You see, God COULD have inspired Paul to write it YOUR way...but he didn’t. Or are we back to God having a public will, that men be saved, and a private ‘secret’ will, that they be damned?
“18In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations, as he had been told, “So shall your offspring be.” 19He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead ( since he was about a hundred years old), or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah’s womb. 20No distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. 22That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness.” 23But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, 24but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, 25 who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.” - Romans 4
Look again...does it say God gave belief to Abram? “In hope he believed against hope...He did not weaken in faith...No distrust made him waver...he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. 22That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness.” Sure seems to be a lot of action verbs in there, with Abram ‘doing’ it.
Blasphemy! How dare Paul insult the sovereignty of God!
“6For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.” - Rom 5 Paul blasphemes again, suggesting we were WEAK. Everyone knows we were DEAD. Why, the Apostle Paul taught that!
“6Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? “ - Romans 6
We present ourselves? To obedience? BLASPHEMY!!! Paul meant God compels us to obedience. Paul just used the wrong words.
“And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.” - 1 Thess 2
YOU received the word of God...YOU accepted it. But they were dead. They could neither receive nor accept!
If God did as you say, either God is a liar, or God had scripture written in a misleading manner. He could very easily have said, “saved by grace thru election”, and we wouldn’t have this discussion. He could have said, “For God so loved the elect”, but it says “world”. He could have said, ‘Whosoever I call to believe”, but he left it at “whosoever believes”.
FWIW: whosoever = “whoever; whatever person”...” individually a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything”...translated in the AV — all 748, all things 170, every 117, all men 41, whosoever 31, everyone 28, whole 12, all manner of 11, every man 11
Either God lies - which IS blasphemy - or God is somewhat less selective than you make Him out to be.
Now, what is it that I can't do?
If John 1:12-13 were the entire Bible, you might be right (though probably not).
But, alas, you have pulled two verses from Scripture trying (it seems) to disprove your own free will.
Ironic, that bit.
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.