For the "personal relationship" with Christ...
Ever consider what birth is like?
Birth starts with pregnancy...since those who are pregnant first, cannot give birth.
When the time is come, full gestation one hopes, uterine contractions begin; the cervix widens, and the baby is pushed out of the womb.
The process is called "labor."
You might note that St. Paul writes in Scripture, about "my little children, with whom I am in labor until Christ is formed in you." Galatians 4:19
OK, there is such a thing as a C-section. ("Christ-section" ?...bad pun)
But in general birth is not instantaneous.
St. Paul also writes to the Corinthians, "Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual, but as worldly—as infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for solid food. In fact, you are still not ready."
So we see the comparison to birth, to infancy and milk, to growing up to maturity in Christ.
From what Scriptures do you get the supposition that the ONLY way to have a relationship with Jesus is to "say the sinner's prayer"?
For the Catholic example...have you ever tried *reading* the autobiographies of any Catholics, whether Saints or visionaries?
One of the Catholic Nuns, spoke of wanting nothing from childhood but to be the humble servant of the Holy Family; and begged her Mother Superior to sell her to Jesus as his little donkey.
She had a number of revelations from Jesus about prayers for God's Mercy in reparation for Atheism and Blasphemy; and that He had chosen her, because she was such a nobody, all the credit would go even more to Him.
I find great similarities in the writings of some of the Saints, with the writings of the Pentecostals, about being led continuously in prayer (and yes, in actions) by the Holy Spirit.
The main difference being, the Catholics all seem to say that God has instructed them Himself, that even if their superiors contradict HIs impression on their hearts, to obey their superiors; whereas Protestants seem to rejoice in any excuse for "We must obey God rather than men."
This, despite St. Paul *immediately* apologizing for reviling the High Priest when he commanded someone to strike Paul...and St. Paul quoting the Scripture, "For it is written, brothers, you must not speak evil of a leader of your people."
Why do the Protestants automatically declare that they get a free pass?
I am beginning to consider that to be a danger, just as Protestants...no, that's not fair. Some Protestants declare in advance, even without finding out what was said, that ALL revelations whatsoever after the close of the New Testament, *must* be diabolical.
The Mariolatry is so strong in Roman Catholicism.
From what Scriptures do you get the supposition that the ONLY way to have a relationship with Jesus is to "say the sinner's prayer"?
You're the one hung up on the phrase "the sinner's prayer".
But if a person is not a believer, that makes them a sinner.
If they ask Jesus for forgiveness and believe He is their savior.....sounds like a prayer from a sinner. Or, a "sinner's prayer."
As much as Roman Catholicism has rote sayings/prayers, etc, for seemingly everything, you'd think you'd be ok with this.
****************
The main difference being, the Catholics all seem to say that God has instructed them Himself, that even if their superiors contradict HIs impression on their hearts, to obey their superiors; whereas Protestants seem to rejoice in any excuse for "We must obey God rather than men."
Well, right now your pope is going off the RC rails....you gonna obey him or God?
********
This, despite St. Paul *immediately* apologizing for reviling the High Priest when he commanded someone to strike Paul...and St. Paul quoting the Scripture, "For it is written, brothers, you must not speak evil of a leader of your people."
1Paul, looking intently at the Council, said, “Brethren, I have lived my life with a perfectly good conscience before God up to this day.” 2The high priest Ananias commanded those standing beside him to strike him on the mouth. 3Then Paul said to him, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! Do you sit to try me according to the Law, and in violation of the Law order me to be struck?” 4But the bystanders said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?” 5And Paul said, “I was not aware, brethren, that he was high priest; for it is written, ‘YOU SHALL NOT SPEAK EVIL OF A RULER OF YOUR PEOPLE.’” Acts 23:1-5
I don't really see an apology from Paul in the exchange.
You might want to head over to the caucus threads and discuss this with some of your fellow RCs...one in particular who daily posts numerous threads against your pope.
I am beginning to consider that to be a danger, just as Protestants...no, that's not fair. Some Protestants declare in advance, even without finding out what was said, that ALL revelations whatsoever after the close of the New Testament, *must* be diabolical.
There are no new revelations.
3Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints Jude 3
Any "vision", "dream" etc, someone claims to have had must be compared to Scripture for accuracy. This is why Christians reject the messages of apparitions. They contain enough falsehood to render anything else they say invalid.
This includes the writings of the ECFs. If they agree with Scripture, ok. If they disagree with Scripture, it is diabolical.
But this leaves the Roman Catholic in a quandary as the ECFs do contradict not only themselves, but Scripture.
At Trent, when Roman Catholicism dogmatized its canon it did not include a single writing from the ECFs.
Why? Only Scripture is God inspired. The ECFs are at best good commentaries, but they are not inspired writings.
So which should a believer rely upon?
I think I'll stand on the Word of God and not fallible men.
The phrase “Mary is an addition channel of Grace.” does not appear ANYWHERE in Scripture.
“Mary is an addition channel of Grace. NOT the source (the factory); but a “factory authorized dealer”.”
Chapter and verse that teaches this?
Large brush; small target: some.
Since the bible has NEVER been shown to be lacking in any way of not being able to get a sinner into heaven; the BEST one can say about any later 'revelation' is that it is redundant.