Posted on 12/26/2011 6:08:22 PM PST by rzman21
What are their opposing doctrines???
1. infant baptism
2. the Eucharist
3. speaking intongues
4. predestination
5. once saved, always saved
should i go on?
where does the Bible say Baptism is an act of identification?
answer = no where
my Bible says:
1. Baptism saves us
2. Baptism is for the remission of sins
3. Baptism is for receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit
4. Baptism puts us into Christ.
this is the orthodox, historical, biblical Faith handed down from the Apostles for 2,000 years.
some departed from this Faith in the 16th century.
that would be pretty hard since St Ignatius spoke of the Catholic Church 225 years before Constantine.
better luck next time.
why do you use CE ( common era ) rather than AD ( year of our Lord )
isn’t Jesus your Lord?
read the paragraph again.
it is saying the Protestant believes THEY READING SCRIPTURE ARE THE ONLY AUTHORITY AND THEY REJECT THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH.
it is not saying Protestants don’t believe in the Holy Spirit.
So, which country?
Certainly not Japan, and probably not India.
It's a tough job but somebody has to do it. The hardest part is figuring out what an idiomatic expression in Language A means in Language B ~ which may require changing the discussion of the cultural base behind each language to come up with something useful.
This is a problem whether you are working with religious texts or any text. The translators necessarily work within a world of agreed upon "bias" whether you like it or not. This is one of the reasons we keep folks around who are fully versed in the understanding of the ancient "original tongues" and are constantly updated concerning the way of life and the culture.
The past, like the future, is not completely visible in the present.
re: “Don’t be so naive. . . Catholics teach that works are a required element of faith to achieve salvation. . . as a Baptist, you should know better than that.”
I am very aware of Catholic teaching on salvation, that they add adhering to the “sacraments” of the church to the essential truth that salvation is found in no other than Jesus Christ. But, both Catholic and Protestant theology agree on the Trinity - that Jesus is God the Son, Second Person of the Trinity, and that only through Him is salvation found. That Jesus is God in the flesh incarnated as a human being. That by His life, death, and resurrection alone can we be saved.
The problem is, as you pointed out, they have added to the essential truth of salvation through faith in Christ alone.
My point was attempting to point out the common ground we both share. Catholics are not the same as the non-Christian cults, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Christian Science, Moonies, etc. who all deny the Trinity. Catholicism is a Christian sect - not a non-Christian sect. I agree that there are key differences between Catholics and Protestants, but that doesn’t mean we cannot be Brothers and Sisters in Christ - if they have accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.
This is not true of non-Christian cults (such as Jehovah’s Witnesses) because they don’t believe in the same Jesus. Catholics and Protestants do agree on a few essential doctrines, but there is no agreement with the cults on ANY essential doctrines.
I’m not demeaning the differences between Catholics and Protestants, some of the differences are extremely important, but we do have some agreement on the essentials.
If you know Christian theology well, you should know better than to say Catholicism is a non-Christian cult. It’s just not true.
re: “Don’t be so naive. . . Catholics teach that works are a required element of faith to achieve salvation. . . as a Baptist, you should know better than that.”
I am very aware of Catholic teaching on salvation, that they add adhering to the “sacraments” of the church to the essential truth that salvation is found in no other than Jesus Christ. But, both Catholic and Protestant theology agree on the Trinity - that Jesus is God the Son, Second Person of the Trinity, and that only through Him is salvation found. That Jesus is God in the flesh incarnated as a human being. That by His life, death, and resurrection alone can we be saved.
The problem is, as you pointed out, they have added to the essential truth of salvation through faith in Christ alone.
My point was attempting to point out the common ground we both share. Catholics are not the same as the non-Christian cults, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Christian Science, Moonies, etc. who all deny the Trinity. Catholicism is a Christian sect - not a non-Christian sect. I agree that there are key differences between Catholics and Protestants, but that doesn’t mean we cannot be Brothers and Sisters in Christ - if they have accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.
This is not true of non-Christian cults (such as Jehovah’s Witnesses) because they don’t believe in the same Jesus. Catholics and Protestants do agree on a few essential doctrines, but there is no agreement with the cults on ANY essential doctrines.
I’m not demeaning the differences between Catholics and Protestants, some of the differences are extremely important, but we do have some agreement on the essentials.
If you know Christian theology well, you should know better than to say Catholicism is a non-Christian cult. It’s just not true.
re: “Don’t be so naive. . . Catholics teach that works are a required element of faith to achieve salvation. . . as a Baptist, you should know better than that.”
I am very aware of Catholic teaching on salvation, that they add adhering to the “sacraments” of the church to the essential truth that salvation is found in no other than Jesus Christ. But, both Catholic and Protestant theology agree on the Trinity - that Jesus is God the Son, Second Person of the Trinity, and that only through Him is salvation found. That Jesus is God in the flesh incarnated as a human being. That by His life, death, and resurrection alone can we be saved.
The problem is, as you pointed out, they have added to the essential truth of salvation through faith in Christ alone.
My point was attempting to point out the common ground we both share. Catholics are not the same as the non-Christian cults, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Christian Science, Moonies, etc. who all deny the Trinity. Catholicism is a Christian sect - not a non-Christian sect. I agree that there are key differences between Catholics and Protestants, but that doesn’t mean we cannot be Brothers and Sisters in Christ - if they have accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.
This is not true of non-Christian cults (such as Jehovah’s Witnesses) because they don’t believe in the same Jesus. Catholics and Protestants do agree on a few essential doctrines, but there is no agreement with the cults on ANY essential doctrines.
I’m not demeaning the differences between Catholics and Protestants, some of the differences are extremely important, but we do have some agreement on the essentials.
If you know Christian theology well, you should know better than to say Catholicism is a non-Christian cult. It’s just not true.
So, which religion is it you are talking about here?
There's nothing in Christianity like that particular Zen belief ~ and I'm startled to find there's someone that thinks that the right way, or whatever like Zen beliefs have slipped over into Christianity.
All Christians make use of the Scriptures and prayer and counsel ~ and with a minion of THREE you get the Holy Spirit with you.
Sorry about posting three in a row. I goofed up.
The devil is having a field day with Catholics who don’t follow their traditions as well. Witness Nancy Pelosi and her ilk. They apparently believe the traditions are up for private interpretation, and it would seem the Pope is not at odds with this since he held a private meeting with Nancy Pelosi herself.
It would seem if an argument holds true for one set of circumstances, it would hold true for another set of similar make-up.
The devil is having a field day with Catholics who don’t follow their traditions as well. Witness Nancy Pelosi and her ilk. They apparently believe the traditions are up for private interpretation, and it would seem the Pope is not at odds with this since he held a private meeting with Nancy Pelosi herself.
It would seem if an argument holds true for one set of circumstances, it would hold true for another set of similar make-up.
Go back and reread the article.
oh, you will get no arguement from me on this.
it’s a scandal that the Church hasn’t excommunicated those that claim the name of Christ, but by their actions ( denying Christ as the only way to heaven, adultrey, abortion, child molesting, etc ) show they are not Christian.
the Catholic Church is experiencing the falling away 2 Thessalonians says will come before the end.
The Church doesn’t provide saving faith (in the Church Age).
God the Holy Spirit provides and grows our faith.
read the NT and give me one example of when the Holy Spirit saved anyone without using the Church.
did this happen in Acts 2?
Acts 8?
Acts 10?
Acts 22?
The Church is the Body of Christ and the instrument of the Holy Spirit.
I don’t need to. Maybe you should.
My, my, you have made so many assumptions in so few words. When the former assumes an agenda on the part of the latter, generally it means that the former had an agenda from the start.
If you want to discuss, fine. If not, then there is little point in trying to answer your unserious questions.
I merely make the point that God, our God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the God whose nature and work is confessed most accurately in the Apostles, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds, is a God of both order and truth, as His written word makes very, very, very plain. He will not contradict His word that He gave to be recorded in written form with another word that He gave in oral form. Or would you deny that?
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.