The Gospel According to History

Truth2Freedom's ^ | Feburary 1,2013 | Nathan Busenitz

[Iscool]

What do you mean by “works”?

Catholics teach that Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross was not sufficient for a full atonement for our sins...

They have come up with 7 sacraments (works) to help cover the cost of part of the atonement themselves...

Catholics and others count their good works toward earning their salvation...

Works is any act a person may perform, any type of charity whether it be giving or work one may do to gain grace or favor with God, or for the purpose of gaining salvation...

I could probably add to that but hope that suffices for your inquiry...

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

Noticed scant responses from the FRoman mafia with regards to this series

__________

the mafia is thrilled that the Catholic Church Fathers are being quoted and praised.
this is something to give praise and glory to God for!
maybe readers will be stimulated to read what these men, who were greatly used by the Holy Spirit to teach and spread the Catholic Faith, really believed about:
1. baptismal regeneration
2. infant baptism
3. the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist
4. the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
5. the canon of Scripture

when they do, they will notice these men would consider all the posters in this thread praising them to be heretics and would consider them outside of the Church.

maybe then they will wonder if they are being obedient to John 17 and 1 Corinthians 1. ( probably not, pride is a terrible sin, one Satan is more than happy to exploit )

[editor-surveyor]

In this case, The “works” of following his commandments as he asked of the churches in Asia, in Revelation, and in the gospels.

The “first things.” Following his Torah, loving and feeding his sheep. These are the things those that love him do, when he writes his Torah on our hearts.

.

[editor-surveyor]

No catholics have been praised on this thread.

[LearsFool]

Yes, thank you, that seems to suffice.

I was afraid you meant works like believing, or being baptized...acts by which we become “in Christ”.

Sometimes people lump those in with the “works” of Romans and Galatians (i.e. keeping the Law of Moses)...acts which Paul says are against becoming “in Christ”.

[LearsFool]

I’m not sure I understand you. Are you referring to the covenant God made with Israel when He brought them out of Egypt? Or the new covenant in Christ’s blood which He made with His church?

[editor-surveyor]

.
The “Works” you refer to in Romans and Galatians have nothing whatsoever to do with “the Law of Moses.” It is the false laws of men forced upon the Jews by the Pharisees. They were what Yeshua invoked the “woes” on the Pharisees and scribes for in Matthew 23.

If you read Acts 28, you will see that it is the “Law of Moses” that Paul preached throughout his ministry. (also see 1Corinthians 11 where he praises the Corinthians for keeping those “ordinances.”)

.

[CynicalBear]

>>The “Works” you refer to in Romans and Galatians have nothing whatsoever to do with “the Law of Moses.”<<

Yes, they do and it's been shown here over and over again.

[redleghunter]

The wresting of church fathers writings by RCs as well as scriptures to justify the later pagan rites is nothing new.

So how much must you do as a Roman Catholic to make up for what you believe is an insufficient sacrifice by Christ Jesus?

[Elsie]

No catholics have been praised on this thread.

I can fix THAT!

PRAISE Pope Francis!!!

He is a GREAT role model for young Catholics worldwide!

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

Lol, the question shows a total lack of understanding the Christian Faith.

Here should be an easy question for you:

Can you name one person who lived between the 2nd and 6th century that denied baptism is for the remission of sins as you do?
Please name them and a the quote from their writings.
Just one.

[stonehouse01]

If this is all so carefully typed out with such diligence to somehow prove that the Church Fathers weren’t Catholic, it isn’t going to work. The Church Fathers believed in oral tradition, the sacraments, and their written preserved writings prove it.

St. Ambrose in particular held a great devotion for the eucharist. The Church Fathers all held to the doctrine of the real presence, so you will never succeed in making them into protestants.

Of course the Church Fathers believed in justification by grace (not works) because that IS Catholic doctrine and was at the time of their writings, as well.

The Catholic Church teaches that we are saved by grace alone, in part because of the Church Father’s very commentaries that have been so graciously and painstakingly provided to prove this very point. (the other part, because that is what scripture tells us as well)

It is a false representation of Catholicism to say otherwise.

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Part Three, Secion One, Chapter Article II; II Grace:

1996 Our justification comes from the grace of God.

The Church’s doctrines do not contradict a single line from those you copied from the Church Fathers; there is no contradiction whatsoever, and to imply that there is shows an utter lack of understanding of the doctrines of the Church.

[redleghunter]

Why do you have to start with the 2nd century to establish your claim?

Acts 16:

27 And the keeper of the prison awaking out of his sleep, and seeing the prison doors open, he drew out his sword, and would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled.

28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here.

29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,

30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.

33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.(KJV)

Acts 10:

42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.(KJV)

A trend. Those with ears that hear, hear the Gospel; they believe; the Holy Spirit fills the believer and they are baptized.

Been happening since Pentecost. The water did not regenerate Cornelius and family...but the Holy Spirit. The water and the man doing the dunking have no powers to wash sins away. Only the Blood of Christ washes us from all sins. You choose to have faith in the proclamation and confirmation of a new Christian instead of the Object of his/her faith.

So here’s another question. Is Christian baptism the Gospel?

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

Let’s start with Acts 2 where Peter was asked what they must do after he preached “ the good news “ to,them.
V38 states he told them to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins and receiving the Holy Spirit.

And for those under the illusion that Paul believed baptism was not for the remission of sins, Paul himself in Acts was to to arise and be baptized washing away his sins.

Thanks for proving my point point. Flee from those who believe no one understood baptism for 1,500 years. It is they that don’t understand baptism, just as they don’t understand the Church teaches the sacrifice of Jesus was PERFECT.

But we were warned false teachers would arise ...........

[winodog]

I like this question. Heres another
Do “works” mean the same to the Jew two thousand years ago as they do to the Christian today?

[Gene Eric]

>> Over the next two installments in this series, we will survey 25 early Christian leaders—each of whom affirmed the truth that justification is through faith alone and not on the basis of works.

Being interested in the Christian transition from Rome, I’m curious about the vetted digest of the author’s effort. Ping me if you have anything relative.

[winodog]

Christ said to each of the seven churches, “I know your works”.

I disagree with your keeping the law, and loving his sheep.

These jews have been scattered out of Jerusalem. They face intense persecution everywhere they go. Either by Roman soldiers, gentile heathens who don’t want them upsetting their idol and soothsayer business and Jews who don’t believe the Messiah came.

They are just barely scrapping by and it wont be long before they are history.

[Elsie]

Can you name one person who lived between the 2nd and 6th century that denied baptism is for the remission of sins as you do? Please name them and a the quote from their writings.

Such a short time span; and such a requirement that they have written something.

[Elsie]

The Church Fathers believed in oral tradition, the sacraments, and their written preserved writings prove it.

Yeah; we get this already.

[LearsFool]

Different people mean different things when they use the term "works". That's why I ask people what they mean by it, so that we're all understanding one another, and not arguing with each other when we're actually in agreement.

Some people seem to think, "Well, works is works!", that the word means the same thing everywhere in the Bible. But that's simply not so. Paul himself used the word to mean different things. For instance, here are some "works" he talks about in Galatians 5:

"fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, divisions, parties, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and such like"

Nobody would ever suppose that THOSE works could earn salvation, would they? That would be too silly for Paul to even argue over. So when he says that salvation is "not of works", he obviously has some other works in mind, right?

Now the question becomes, what sort of works IS he talking about when he says salvation is "not of works" (Eph. 2:9, etc.)?

If we can determine that, I think we can clear up this whole confusion