Catholicism made me Protestant

First Things ^ | 9/11/2019 | Onsi A. Kamel

[Bulwyf]

As I figured, ignore the truth of the RC church.

I think you meant plain, not “plane”.

[daniel1212]

Heresy: That “special” moment when you have greater spiritual insight than the apostles, disciples, apostolic and holy fathers and the entire past and present ..

Actually in RC theology "the church" judges the so-called "church fathers" more than they judge her, and it is her who decides who is a valid church father and their teaching. Thus heresy according to Rome can be deciding that you better understand the ancients than she.

And the censure of those who dared contradict the magisterium was basically the response of those who sat in the seat of Moses to the common people who believed in the Messiah that Scripture promised.

Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him? The officers answered, Never man spake like this man. Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived? Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed. (John 7:45-49)

Yet in principal this censure also applies to your brethren who think they are the ones to determine the validity of church teaching and pope based upon their judgment of what historical teaching is and means. And it seems that these are the majority of vocal RCs here.

[Luircin]

Read Ephesians 2 and tell me that Catholicism has it right.

Oh wait, you did but you added words into it so you could justify your false beliefs.

[Luircin]

That much we can agree on, so I guess we’ll have to leave it there for now.

[Bulwyf]

http://www.the-bible-antichrist.com/roman-catholic-church-persecution.html

Nobody really wants to address this I suppose. This scratches the surface, but history is well documented even up to recently.

So all arguments aside, if we want to talk fruits again, let’s talk fruits.

[daniel1212]

Paul also says "If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." (1 Corinthians 13:2). So even "ALL FAITH' gets you "nothing" if you have not love. If we will allow Jesus to chime in for a moment here, He says: "If you love me, keep my commandments." So it seems the commandments still retain a tad bit of relevance, somehow, despite our advanced theology. I don't see where it says "Faith and bowl of pasta will get you eternal life," but we do have St. James saying "Faith without works is dead." (James 2:17). This is probably a good illustration of the insufficiency of trying to prove things via one-liner proof-texting. Paul made reference to "all of Scripture," not one-liners. So put that in your pasta-cooker, with a nice dollop of olive oil and grain of salt. Tagline, to see the only place in Scripture where it says "faith alone"

Are you serious or a sophist? Do you really believe after all this time that sola fide means that a faith that will not effect obedience is salvific, versus it being the faith that is behind works of faith that is was justifies, as explained and shown already?

As shown below, the idea of an inert dead faith being salvific is hardly one that is tenable according to Luther himself. However, you cannot confuse the effect of faith with its cause, any more than the effect of forgiveness in the story of the palsied man in Mk. 2 is to made the cause, even though as is sometimes the case with faith and works, to say one thing is to say the other.

And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? 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? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. (Mark 2:8-11)

Martin Luher: "it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire! "

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Yes, the plane meaning of the words of Scripture must be false since they contradict the opinions of a 16th German monk.

[daniel1212]

But which does not mean that salvific faith is one that is inert, and is unrelated to obedience, but that it is expressive, effectual faith which effects obedience that is counted for righteousness, making the believer "accepted in the Beloved" (Eph. 1:6) on His account.

Truem good, and beautiful.

Good, but then somehow (which I find hard to believe) after years on FR, you must think this is contrary to the sola fide of Reformers or whom "Perseverance of the saints" is a requirement for claiming to be one of the elect.

Or were you mistaken in your affirmation of my description of sola fide?

[daniel1212]

Is Charles Spurgeon committing a grave sin when he comments Matthew 10:22 by stating: Enduring to the end We must not enter the work of the ministry without counting the cost. I.Perseverance is the badge of the saint.

If anyone here disagrees with that then they disagree with me also, but not that the obedience of faith merits justification, versus living effectual faith purifying the heart and justifying the person, rendering him "accepted in the Beloved" on Christ's account.

[daniel1212]

"Ye see then how that by works a man is * justified, and not** by faith only." - James 2:24 (KJV) Don't get me wrong, I can easily see how you can neatly interpret this in a quite opposite sense.

Which, if meaning that works of faith actually merit a right standing with God, versus the faith behind such being what justifies, then James is contradicting both Moses and Paul, who affirm

And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness. (Genesis 15:5-6)

And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara’s womb: He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. (Romans 4:19-22)

Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification. (Romans 4:23-25)

While actually realizing the fulfillment of the promise of God required some response on the part of Abraham, and NT believers are exhorted to continue in obedient faith, and are to labor to please God, yet obtaining a justified state for Abraham and NT believers is by faith being counted for righteousness.

[Mark17]

It depends some on which Catholic you are talking to. For some FRomans on this board, not even other Catholics are Catholic enough for them.

You mean, like Pope Frank? You can’t even jokingly ask the question anymore, is the pope catholic, cuz many think he is not.

[daniel1212]

So we are not saved by faith alone: faith must be accompanied with changing our lives, i.e. good works.

That is actually how sola fide was described in no less a document than the Westminster confession:

Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification;(d) yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love.(e) - https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/westminster-confession-faith/

What Catholics seemingly cannot comprehend or allow is that is it the faith that will effect obedience that is counted for righteousness, but the effect is not the cause, the means of appropriation, even though they are two sides of the same coin.

[Luircin]

The church fathers taught faith alone.

Your salvation through works nonsense was thought up over 1000 years after Christ.

Don’t blame Luther for going back to the faith of the ACTUAL Apostles and not the fake ones that Rome set up.

[Mark17]

But that does not mean the works save someone. It simply is the FRUIT of the salvation, not the cause of it.

Hasn’t that been stated about 43.5 million times? I know Elsie told me a billon times, not to exaggerate, but it appears some just can’t quite grasp the concept. Do you suppose 1st Corinthians 2:14 is the reason? 😁

[ebb tide]

What Catholics seemingly cannot comprehend or allow is that is it the faith that will effect obedience that is counted for righteousness,...

Are not works counted for righteosness? Or are works all for naught?

[Mark17]

Shall I get out the popcorn and lots of butter while we wait for an answer?

Or, you could wait till you need last rites. You will wait just about as long. 😁👎😆🤣🤗😂🙃

[daniel1212]

And since the Bible indeed does not contradict itself, James’ explicit statement that we are not saved by faith alone shows how the Protestant interpretation of Paul is false.

But if Abraham was not justified until he offered up Abraham then you have a clear contradiction btwn James vs. Moses and Paul. See also post 270

However, there can be no contradiction if James is wholly inspired of God, and while Paul is describing what actually appropriates justification before God for the sinner, with this being the contextual issue, and in which Abraham was justified by faith, not any works, though the faith of Abraham is shown to be an obedient one. Meanwhile James is contextually dealing with whether a fruitless or fruitful believer is justified, and in which it is a faith that works which justifies (and justifies one as being a believer), and not a bare faith. The plain teaching is that James is speaking

[daniel1212]

Yes, the plane meaning of the words of Scripture must be false since they contradict the opinions of a 16th German monk. So much for the idea of sola Scriptura.

You mean Luther believed that a faith without works of faith was a living salvific faith?

[MHGinTN]

I wonder, that old Brick mason who built chimneys ... he had an iron L shaped bar that was absolutely straight which he would rest at the corner of a coarse of bricks then position up the edge of layers, to justify / straighten out of alignment bricks for the straightness. I wonder how he would read James?

[ebb tide]

Was not Abel's sacrifice a work?

Was not Jesus Christ's passion and crucifixion a work?

Are we not taught to be Christ-like?