Posted on 11/28/2017 12:09:34 PM PST by ebb tide
I’ll have to acquaint you with Vlad’s Rules of Internet Debate.
Irrelevant. There were always plenty of angels to pray to in the OT (which Caths pray to), as well as occasions of need to do so if that was viable and allowed, but instead the closest thing is that of Davind asking the Lord, "Let their way be dark and slippery: and let the angel of the Lord persecute them." (Psalms 35:6)
But but we have been told there has never been a bit of anti-Protestant bigotry on FR, and that Catholic are not see starting any argument with protestants on FR.
I know what Catholicism is
You may think you do, but if you hang around a bit you may see how divisive this class is and can be!
Matthew Chapter 25 Does the above sound like "by faith alone"? It looks more like it's about "faith and works", doesn't it?
That is a strawman of solafide, which does not teach than an inert faith is salvific, but only that which effects obedience by the Spirit. God purifies the heart by faith, and which faith is manifest in baptism and obedience, but the effect is not the cause of justification, as "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." (Romans 4:5)
Abraham was thus justified by faith (Gn. 15:6) before he went to offer up Issac, (Gn. 22) but which justified him as one having true faith, and in that sense works are necessary as fruit, "things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak," (Hebrews 6:9) though God sees the heart.
Those of a convicted broken (or pride) heart and contrite spirit needs only to believe on the Christ of the gospels to receive deliverance (Luke 8:50) and or forgiveness, (Jn. 3:26; 5:24; Acts 10:43) but since only effectual faith is salvific, promises of salvation are also made to those confess the Lord in word and in deed (Acts 2:38; Romans 10:9-10), who do the will of God by the Spirit (Hebrews 10:36; Romans 8:13,14) who obey, (Mark 16:16; Hebrews 5:9) for to do the latter (obedience) testifies to doing the former (effectual justifying faith in heart)
Likewise the Lord said in dealing with the palsied man, "Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?" (Mark 2:9) for to do the former was to do the latter.
But despite some extreme hyperbole to the contrary, and faults, in clear statements brave Luther himself rejected the idea that a faith which did not effect characteristic obedience was salvific, stating,
So upthread you criticized me for cherry picking verses when I posted one or two, posting them *out of context*.
So now I post them IN context, and you are criticizing me for posting *book-length technicolor rants* that you admit that you don't even bother to read.
That begs the question.
Can anyone do anything good enough for you?
Here's a little fact for you: they weren't, but were While Hitler was baptized (sprinkled) into the Roman Catholic Church, and Stalin into the Russian Orthodox Church (both reportedly later baptized by Mormons) and was in train to be a priest, yet unlike circumcision, the stated requirements for baptism in Scripture are repentance and wholehearted faith, (Acts 2:38; 8:36,37) thus souls believed and were baptized. (Acts 8:12)
While the Holy Spirit is not negligent in providing important details, and contrary to the paramount importance Catholicism places upon baptizing infants, even allowing anyone to do so (if in conformance in form and matter and basic intent), the Holy Spirit nowhere records any baptism of infants, despite recording many by infants.
Thus as with the case of another most basic practice utterly absent from the Scriptures, Catholicms must resort to extrapolation, reading paedobaptim into sparse simple statements of whole household baptisms. As well as forcing a level of correspondence to OT circumcision that the NT does not provide.
Which is more proof that the Catholic church did not write or change the Bible (contrary to Islamic charges), for it would not be hard to write in some of the missing Catholic distinctives .
Advice: Beware of using blatant personal ad hominem such as here, however it may seem warranted.
And see Luther’s emphasis on the place and need for works in post http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3608661/posts?page=344#344
“I’ll have to acquaint you with Vlad’s Rules of Internet Debate.”
If you’re going to mention me by name while attacking me at least have the courage to ping me as well. Try.
> Modernism started when chrstianity declared the Torah “fulfilled” (ie, repealed).
There are no conservative christians. Christians are revolutionaries by definition.
True, but for some reason they seem completely blind to that fact. They actually seem to believe that Adam, Noah, Abraham, David, and Ezra were chrstians . . . whether "born again" or liturgical.
Isn't it a hoot to see the ancient churches who invented the Protestant argument against "works" squealing when the same argument is used against them???
An attack?? My, my what thin skin you have.
You are correct that Cornelius was not yet saved before Peter preached to them and they believed. And what they believe was
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. (Acts 10:43)
That was it, and indeed they did believe, with God giving "them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:8-9)
The same gift promised to those in Acts 2:38 if they would repent and believe in the LJC was essentially promised to those in Acts 10:43 (not by works..by the "washing of regeneration": Titus 3:5)
However, there is no contradiction, and need to attribute a unique condition of heart to Cornelius and company if we understand both as a call to faith, this being what purifies the heart. Since real faith effects confession, and if one confesses the Lord Jesus from the heart then it means one believes, then the promises is made "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38)
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. (Romans 10:9-11)
It is only such faith that will confess the Lord Jesus, which baptism formally does, that is salvific, But since it is actually the faith behind the work that justifies, that appropriates the purifying their hearts, the "washing of regeneration," then the promise can be made, "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins." (Acts 10:43) And which was realized.
Such souls are washed, sanctified, and "justified justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Corinthians 6:11) And thus ojn Christ's account such are accepted in the Beloved and made to sit together with Him in Heaven, (Eph. 1:6; 2:6) which will be realized when they die in overcoming, saving faith, (Rv. 3:21) or at His return. (1Ths. 4:17)
However, it cannot be the confession that merits justification, since it is faith which is counted for righteousness, (Rm. 4:5) nor that the change that regeneration effects makes them good enough to be with God, unless simply being forgiven is enough and thus maintaining a sinless state, versus perfection of character also being required, which even Paul confessed he lacked, and strove to be in this life as much as a resurrected believer will be, which event he looked forward to as being what would finally deal with his "vile body," (Phil 3:8-21) though to be presently absent from the body was to be present with the Lord. (2 Corinthians 5:8; Phil 1:21-22)
As for Acts 8:16-17, I in the absence of more persuasion, I also hold to be reasonable what you conclude, that "At other times [though to be precise, this was the only time recorded], people have faith and are baptized for some time and only later receive a greater gift of the Holy Spirit .
Some posit that the apostles were required to lay hands on such, but the Ethiopian eunuch was baptized by deacon Phillip and went on his way joyfully without any.
Paul for his part believed enough to obey God/Christ (which he though he was doing before) but awaited further revelation before he was filled with the Spirit, which was provided thru "a certain disciple at Damascus," (Acts 9:10) "one Ananias, a devout man according to the law," who confirms Christ as being "that Just One" whom he was to serve, and instructs "be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord," (Acts 22:10-16) thus confessing the Lord.
Yet based on the two but supplementary accounts, before he was baptized Ananias "entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. (Acts 9:17-18)
It is certain that God cannot be put in a box, but it is evident that baptism and conversion were normatively one event in Scripture, since faith in the heart and confession with the lips - and legs via baptism - go hands in hand, and one cannot claim to believe while not obeying.
Yet again, it is faith which appropriates justification with the purifying of the heart, faith being counted as righteousness, even before it is expressed in baptism, which countless examples of conversions with profound changes in heart and life via regeneration testify to, as with Cornelius and company, though the time of expression be the time when one effectually believes. That is my conclusion without any constraints over where the evidences leads to.
Other than this, there seems no end to the argument within chrstianity.
The message that is completely absent in this article is quite simply, the Gospel:
They should stick to something that they can prove or keep their mouth shut. but on the other hand both sides just throw words around to see where they land.
It is doing nothing but matching wits and has nothing to do with the word of God.
Personally, i think both the Catholic and most Protestant Church`s are Satans Church`s.
Which only proves that water baptism means nothing.
Which only proves that water baptism means nothing.
You are correct MM. It also proves Godwin’s law is alive and well on FR.
Godwin’s law
A term that originated on Usenet, Godwin's Law states that as an online argument grows longer and more heated, it becomes increasingly likely that somebody will bring up Adolf Hitler or the Nazis. When such an event occurs, the person guilty of invoking Godwin's Law has effectively forfieted the argument.
Now MM, I need to have me prayer time, and enjoy my sssurance of salvation. If others have no assurance of salvation, then there is a better than even chance they will bust Hell wide open. They have been warned 😱😩👎🔥
All you poor folks on this thread could solve this dilemma by simply rejecting the “new testament” and chrstianity altogether.
***
Sir, if all you care to post is condescending commentary, I invite you to stuff it where the sun shines not. Besides, I was under the impression that Judiasm was a non-evangelizing religion.
But if you’re really interested in why this is important, here, I’ll explain in short terms.
There’s plenty of evidence that Jesus rose from the dead under his own power; if he did, then he proved his claim to be God in the flesh. If he IS God, then we should pay attention to what he says, because, you know, GOD.
Not a snow balls chance bro. Why would anyone want to reject the greatest gift that God could ever give? If you want to reject the New Testament, knock yourself out. Just remember, this same Jesus, that the vast majority of the world rejects, will one day be their judge. The lake of fire, originally created for the devil and his angels, awaits most of the people on earth. It ain’t gonna be pretty.
If we are doing this we are bearing fruit...or call it works. Either way, we are now working for Him and His kingdom.
Mathew 5
48 “Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Matthew 6:
33 “But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
This is where we bear the fruit.
“An attack?? My, my what thin skin you have.”
It has nothing to do with anyone’s supposed thin skin. I just called it what it was. Gee, are you triggered by 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.