Posted on 01/23/2014 9:29:40 PM PST by NKP_Vet
1. Best One-Sentence Summary: I am convinced that the Catholic Church conforms much more closely to all of the biblical data, offers the only coherent view of the history of Christianity (i.e., Christian, apostolic Tradition), and possesses the most profound and sublime Christian morality, spirituality, social ethic, and philosophy.
2. Alternate: I am a Catholic because I sincerely believe, by virtue of much cumulative evidence, that Catholicism is true, and that the Catholic Church is the visible Church divinely-established by our Lord Jesus, against which the gates of hell cannot and will not prevail (Mt 16:18), thereby possessing an authority to which I feel bound in Christian duty to submit.
3. 2nd Alternate: I left Protestantism because it was seriously deficient in its interpretation of the Bible (e.g., "faith alone" and many other "Catholic" doctrines - see evidences below), inconsistently selective in its espousal of various Catholic Traditions (e.g., the Canon of the Bible), inadequate in its ecclesiology, lacking a sensible view of Christian history (e.g., "Scripture alone"), compromised morally (e.g., contraception, divorce), and unbiblically schismatic, anarchical, and relativistic. I don't therefore believe that Protestantism is all bad (not by a long shot), but these are some of the major deficiencies I eventually saw as fatal to the "theory" of Protestantism, over against Catholicism. All Catholics must regard baptized, Nicene, Chalcedonian Protestants as Christians.
4. Catholicism isn't formally divided and sectarian (Jn 17:20-23; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 1:10-13).
5. Catholic unity makes Christianity and Jesus more believable to the world (Jn 17:23).
6. Catholicism, because of its unified, complete, fully supernatural Christian vision, mitigates against secularization and humanism.
7. Catholicism avoids an unbiblical individualism which undermines Christian community (e.g., 1 Cor 12:25-26).
8. Catholicism avoids theological relativism, by means of dogmatic certainty and the centrality of the papacy.
(Excerpt) Read more at ourcatholicfaith.org ...
“He neither removed any books from his German translation of the Bible nor did he “distort” it to “serve his needs”.”
So you’re claiming that Luther’s Bible included the deuterocanonicals in the Old Testament in the proper place which would show he believed they were canonical? Really?
And you don’t think that Luther treated several books of the NT as less than canonical scripture? Then how is it that that is still a strain with in Lutheran though among “even by orthodox Lutheran teachers”? http://cyclopedia.lcms.org/display.asp?t1=a&word=ANTILEGOMENA
And about Romans 3:28: Philip Schaff (a Protestant) asserts in his book, In The Protestant Spirit of Luther’s Version:
“The most important example of dogmatic influence in Luther’s version is the famous interpolation of the word alone in Rom. 3:28 (allein durch den Glauben), by which he intended to emphasize his solifidian doctrine of justification, on the plea that the German idiom required the insertion for the sake of clearness. But he thereby brought Paul into direct verbal conflict with James, who says (James 2:24), “by works a man is justified, and not only by faith” (”nicht durch den Glauben allein”). It is well known that Luther deemed it impossible to harmonize the two apostles in this article, and characterized the Epistle of James as an “epistle of straw,” because it had no evangelical character (”keine evangelische Art”).” http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/7_ch04.htm
You posted two paragraphs. Where in those two paragraphs did the sentence I posted appear? If it is not in those two paragraphs, how exactly is it “context”?
“Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died;
this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die.
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.”
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?”
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”
These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum
Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”
Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, “Does this shock you?
What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?
It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
But there are some of you who do not believe.” Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.”
As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him
Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”
Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”
Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you twelve? Yet is not one of you a devil?”
He was referring to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot; it was he who would betray him, one of the Twelve.” [John 6: 49-71]
Like the Catholic church does when it mistranslates the word *repent* to *do penance* to support its doctrine of works?
Or mistranslating the pronoun *he* to *she* in Genesis 3:15 to give Mary credit that is due Jesus?
Like the Catholic church does when it mistranslates the word *repent* to *do penance* to support its doctrine of works?
Or mistranslating the pronoun *he* to *she* in Genesis 3:15 to give Mary credit that is due Jesus?
The consensus back then was that there was salvation in no one else. Today the consensus is, well......maybe not.....
So true...It is apostasy to claim that doctrine would be developed 'later'...The doctrines are within the scriptures and have been since the 1st Century...
Please explain what this has to do with the Scriptural plan God has laid out through His Son? Where does anything you posted have anything to do with declaring alternative ways to Heaven? It doesn’t. Nothing you’ve posted shows that there are other ways to Heaven but through Christ, nor do they deny that “All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God”. Or were you posting to something else or someone else?
“The Catechism of the Catholic Church is pretty clear on this. Oh, but I forget, the Catechism is witchcraft. Pardon me.”
You said it. I didn’t. I would term it “heresy” though, rather than “witchcraft”. If that’s what is being taught in Catholicism, it’s in direct conflict with and contradiction to Scripture — whether you or any other Catholic believes it “fair” and “just” or not. Given a choice, I’ll stick with what God has said about His plan rather than the politically-correct distortions mankind has created — even if others think they are “whacky”. Their argument, again, is with God and I can’t help them there.
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
Mankind is without excuse.
Your argument is with God who said this, not with us who have shown you what God said in His Word, the very Bible that Catholics and the Catholic church claims to have given the world.
What...the SAME Luther you just a few posts ago declared was a liar??? The "Luther Schizophrenia Syndrome" strikes again! ☺
Not even close...Faith leads to salvation...Not grace...Grace is given before faith takes place...Grace is given to all men, not just those who get faith...
haha The “even Luther...” syndrome.
He was the Devil but sometimes the Devil is right?
Head spinning.
“Please explain what this has to do with the Scriptural plan God has laid out through His Son?”
They are His Words. Argue with Him.
???? Meaning what??? I think you are confused. Nowhere did I say there were other ways to Heaven but through His Son. On the contrary, that’s what I and many other Protestants here have been contending. Your post is a non-sequitur. It is one of your fellow Catholics who is making that argument. Your post has nothing to do with either side of that argument.
Luther Derangement Syndrome?
So LSS or LDS?
Probably LSS is better so as not to become confused with the Mormons.
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.