Posted on 08/08/2025 3:48:54 PM PDT by Roman_War_Criminal
Five hundred years have passed since the Reformation began, and yet the influence of the Roman Catholic Church remains strong. I’m not referring to the mammoth oligarchy that seeks to dictate the lives of an estimated one billion people, but rather its continuing influence upon churches outside its realm, including many that adhere to the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture.
While attending Talbot Seminary, I wrote my master’s thesis on Roman Catholic Justification in the Light of Scripture. In my study, I discovered that Catholicism’s key departure from Scripture was its firm insistence that God’s justification of sinners happens at the end of their life. This teaching contradicts what Paul wrote in Romans 5:1: “Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
In other words, God justifies us at the moment of our regeneration (see also Titus 3:4-7). Why is it so important to affirm this clear biblical truth?
It’s because the error of placing our justification at the end of one’s life has crept into evangelical churches in various forms that continue to grow in popularity, as well as negate the glorious hope embedded in the Gospel. It does so by. . .
Undoing the Finality of Our Salvation
I’m not aware of when Catholic theologians first decided that God’s justification of the sinner happens at the end of one’s life, but by the time of Reformation, it had become deeply entrenched in the church’s dogma. This teaching provided the church with the means to control the lives of its members from birth to the grave.
As a result, Catholics can never be sure of their salvation since their final destination depends upon their obedience as well as adherence to the church’s sacraments up to the time of last rites. Under such a scenario, how could anyone be certain of the final outcome of their faith?
Scripture tells us a much different story. Not only does it reveal that God justifies us at the moment of our regeneration, but it also provides us with the security of our hope that Catholicism kills. When God justifies the sinner, He declares that person not guilty of all his or her sins, past present, and future.
The word for “justify” in the Greek comes from the law courts of Paul’s day; it depicted a judge declaring the accused “not guilty” of their crimes. For us, it’s the legal declaration of our righteousness that comes solely through faith by grace. God declares us innocent solely because Jesus bore the punishment for our sins on the cross; His blood covers all of our iniquity. Romans 8:1 states the finality of God’s proclamation of our righteousness, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”
Later in Romans 8, the apostle elaborates on the permanence of God’s verdict: “He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.” (Romans 8:32-34).
For all of us in Christ Jesus, our justification is a done deal. God, who is not bound by time, looked at our entire life and declared us not guilty of all our sins. Who can possibly overturn His verdict? No one can provide Him with evidence that He didn’t already know about.
The belief that one can lose their salvation, or walk away from their faith, reflects the Roman Catholic understanding of justification, which regards it as a process that’s not fully settled until death. The only way to deny the finality of our salvation is to either say that someone can reverse God’s verdict, which is impossible, or somehow repackage the Catholic teaching of when God credits our account with His righteousness. If it happens at the time of our rebirth, it’s an absolute done deal.
Subjecting the Believer to a Works Mentality
The Roman Catholic error regarding justification empowers the church to enforce obedience whether it be to its traditions, its sacraments, or Scripture. Do we see this same works mentality today outside of the Catholic faith? We do.
I have experienced various forms of legalism in my life. Such teachings deceive believers into thinking they must earn favor with God, which is something they already fully possess via their secure righteous standing before Him, i.e., their justification.
Legalism reverses the order of chapters in the book of Ephesians. Instead of encouraging adherence to Paul’s instructions based upon one’s secure righteous standing before God, the works mentality begins with the commands as the way to assure the believer of his or her favor in the Lord’s sight. Paul never intended for chapters 4-6 of Ephesians to be the means of obtaining God’s approval, but rather the result of our permanent “holy and blameless” standing before God (Ephesians 1:3-14).
Once our focus shifts away from Christ and what He has done for us to how we should live, we lose the joy that comes from our security and the peace from knowing we will surely meet Jesus in the air in the future. The works mentality, popular in many Evangelical churches, is a remnant of Catholicism that spotlights our behavior rather than our glorious hope in Jesus’ appearing.
Adhering to the False Teaching of Replacement Theology
The refusal of a great many churches today to recognize the prophetic significance of Israel also mirrors Catholicism’s teaching on Bible prophecy.
Replacement Theology, or amillennialism, is the longstanding belief of the Roman Catholic Church. Augustine, a fifth century theologian, popularized the teaching that the church is the new Israel, which replaced the church in God’s prophetic program. He denied the future restoration of Israel and applied the Lord’s many promises to do so to the church, albeit spiritually.
Because Israel’s miraculous reappearance as a nation on May 14, 1948, contradicted its long held beliefs, the Vatican refused to recognize Israel as a nation until the end of 1993, a full forty-five years later. Why the delay apart from their realization that Israel’s astounding rebirth refuted their longstanding amillennial beliefs?
What does today’s popularity of Replacement Theology in Bible-believing churches have to do with a biblical understanding of justification? I provide a full answer to this question in my previous article: Can God Change His Mind about Israel? Or About Us?
Based upon Romans 11:28-32, I explain how God’s unfailing mercy lies at the heart of His continuing faithfulness to us as well as to Jacob’s descendants. He will not renege on any of His promises to His people, whether it be to the nation of Israel or to us as New Testament saints. Chapters 9-11 in the book of Romans were not a rabbit trail in Paul’s line of thought, but rather a critical part of it as he showed how the promised future restoration of Israel demonstrates the Lord’s unfailing mercy not only to the Jewish nation, but also to all justified saints, which He proclaimed in Romans 8:31-38.
Identifying the Church as God’s Kingdom
From its inception, the Roman Catholic Church believed it was God’s physical kingdom on earth and hence a political entity, which directly results from its adherence to Replacement Theology, which teaches that the church is just such a realm. Its role as a governing power during the Dark Ages has long since faded, but not this exalted view of itself.
The Vatican is officially the “Vatican City State.” This came about via the 1929 Lateran Treaty between the Holy See and the Kingdom of Italy through which it became an officially recognized independent governing state. The US sends an ambassador to the Vatican, just like it does for other governing entities.
Unfortunately, the Reformation didn’t change the perception of the church as God’s corporal kingdom on earth. Many churches, deeply steeped in amillennialism or its offshoots, continue to teach that Jesus is now reigning over the nations in fulfillment of such passages such as Psalms 2 and 46 as well as Revelation 20:1-10.
During the past few decades, Dominion Theology has grown exponentially in popularity. It asserts that the church will bring about millennial conditions on the earth and rule over it before Jesus’ returns. Is this not a variation the long ago kingdom aspirations of the Vatican?
The Bible teaches that as New Testament saints; we are heirs to a kingdom rather than current possessors of it (Ephesians 1:12-14; James 2:5). Paul couldn’t have been more clear when he said: “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable” (1 Corinthians 15:50). When Jesus appears, He will transform our lowly bodies into ones like His, immortal and incorruptible (Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Corinthians 15:51-55). He will make us fit to inherit His kingdom that’s coming to the earth.
The Bible never identifies the church as a kingdom, but rather describes it as the “body of Christ” with Jesus as its Head. The picture of body life in Romans 12:3-8 is most certainly not that of a kingdom, but rather of functioning entity were all its members enjoy an equal standing. Furthermore, the role of the leaders of a kingdom differs radically from the humble servant leadership Jesus prescribed for His Church (Mark 10:42-45; see also 1 Peter 5:1-5).
Why does this matter? It signifies that we are not now enjoying the glories of God’s promised kingdom on the earth as those who adhere to Replacement Theology claim. The good news is that in the future, we will participate in God’s spectacular kingdom on earth with immortal bodies in a realm devoid of wars, government corruption, overt wickedness, and injustice.
Making One’s Obedience and Feelings the Validation of Salvation
I heard a pastor say this in his Sunday sermon, “You are okay if you love the Lord.” No, no, no, no!! The Bible says that all those in Christ are “okay” because the Lord loves us!
Looking to one’s feelings, or even obedience, as the validation of one’s salvation yields the same fruit as the rigors of Catholicism: it traps believers in the same web of insecurity that obstructs their walk with the Lord and turns their focus away from their joyous blessed hope in Jesus’ appearing.
If it’s true that God’s justification of the sinner happens at the moment of our redemption (Titus 3:4-7) and is by its nature wholly irreversible (Romans 8:1 and 26-39), and Scripture teaches that both are true, the Bible must be the sole rock upon which we must base our assurance of eternal life, not our feelings, our love for the Lord, nor our obedience to some standard.
Our assurance of eternal life comes from what Scripture says about us as New Testament saints, i.e., our justification though faith alone by grace.
A biblical understanding of what happens when God justifies us counters the hope-killing remains of Roman Catholicism in today’s churches that rob believers of the joy that comes from knowing the certainty of their salvation. Scripture frees us from the works mentality that results from thinking we can lose our salvation, walk away from our faith, or must work to keep ourselves within God’s favor and love for us.
Sadly, these vestiges of Roman Catholicism persist in many churches outside its realm. Not only do they breed insecurity and a works-based validation of our hope of eternal life, but in many cases these places of worship also dismiss the biblical hope that we will reign with Jesus in His glorious kingdom, one that will include a restored Israel. Our hope in Jesus’ appearing and what happens afterward is not just dry theology, but something that breathes life into our souls each and every day.
If you have not yet placed your faith in Jesus or are unsure of your salvation, please see my article, Jesus is the Only Path to Eternal Life. In it, I explain the saving message of the cross and how you can know that you belong to the Savior.
Elsie, you quote Acts 15:19–31, emphasizing “write,” “whole Church,” “not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements,” and the “encouraging message” received by the Gentiles
You highlight “write” (Acts 15:23), showing the apostles and elders issued a binding letter. This demonstrates the Church’s authority to teach, guided by the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28, “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us”). Catholics see this as a model for the Magisterium, where apostolic successors (2 Timothy 2:2) clarify doctrine, as in later councils (e.g., Nicaea, 325 AD). The letter’s authority, rooted in Matthew 16:19 (Peter’s keys) and Matthew 18:18 (binding and loosing), refutes the idea that Scripture alone suffices, as oral tradition also binds (2 Thessalonians 2:15).
Your emphasis on “whole Church” (Acts 15:22) aligns with Catholic teaching that the Church discerns truth collectively under apostolic leadership. Peter’s pivotal speech (Acts 15:7–11) and James’ practical directives (Acts 15:13–21) show hierarchy and community working together, not autonomous individualism. This supports the Catholic view of the Church as the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15), not a loose coalition.
You stress “not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements” (Acts 15:28–29), implying Catholic teachings like sacraments or final purification add unnecessary burdens. The council’s requirements (abstaining from idol food, blood, strangled meat, and sexual immorality) were pastoral, not exhaustive, addressing specific Gentile issues. The apostles didn’t limit doctrine to these but taught sacraments like Baptism (Acts 2:38, John 3:5) and the Eucharist (1 Corinthians 11:23–25), which foster holiness (Matthew 5:48). Final purification, ensuring “nothing unclean” enters heaven (Revelation 21:27), is a merciful extension of grace (1 Corinthians 3:13–15), not a burden.
You note the Gentiles “were glad for its encouraging message” (Acts 15:31), suggesting simplicity in faith. Catholics agree the Gospel is encouraging, but it includes obedience to apostolic teaching (Acts 2:42), which encompasses sacraments and purification. The early Church, as Ignatius (Smyrnaeans 8:1, c. 107 AD) shows, saw the Eucharist and bishops as central, not burdensome, rooted in Christ’s commands (John 6:53–56, Matthew 16:18–19).
You’re making the mistake of ignoring the apostles’ broader authority (John 20:22–23, Luke 22:19–20). By emphasizing “write” and “whole Church,” you overlook the council’s hierarchical structure under Peter (Acts 15:7–11) and the role of tradition (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Early Christians like Justin Martyr (First Apology 66, c. 150 AD) upheld sacraments, showing continuity, not addition. Your view reduces the Gospel to a minimalistuc level that was alien to the Early Christians
Markie mark, you put that same red herring about James over and over again.
It’s false.
You claim James and Jude were Jesus’ half-brothers, natural children of Mary and Joseph, implying Mary had other children after Jesus. Scripture does not support this.
The “brothers” of Jesus (e.g., James and Jude, Matthew 13:55) are never called sons of Mary in the Bible. In Jewish culture, “brothers” (Greek: adelphoi) often referred to cousins or kin (e.g., Lot as Abraham’s “brother,” Genesis 14:14, despite being a nephew).
Your error assumes a modern nuclear family model, ignoring biblical and cultural context.
Your assertion that Mary and Joseph had a “normal sex life” after Jesus’ birth lacks scriptural evidence. Matthew 1:25 states Joseph “knew her not until” Jesus was born, but “until” (heōs) in Greek doesn’t imply later relations (e.g., 2 Samuel 6:23, Michal childless “until” death).
Jude’s epistle (Jude 1) identifies him as “brother of James,” not Mary’s son. Your claim lacks evidence and assumes a non-biblical family structure.
Then, Marco, you put the same nonsense deflection about Peter vs James.
You argue James, Jesus’ “half-brother,” was head of the Jerusalem church, not Peter. Scripture shows Peter as the leader of the apostles (Matthew 16:18–19, “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church”; Luke 22:31–32, strengthen your brethren). In Acts 15:7–11, Peter’s speech at the Council of Jerusalem decisively settles the Gentile question, showing his authority. James, a leader in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:9), offers practical directives (Acts 15:13–21) under Peter’s doctrinal lead. Galatians 1:19 calls James “the Lord’s brother,” but not head; Peter’s primacy is clear (Acts 2:14, 1:15–26)
The Catholic view of Mary’s virginity, Peter’s primacy, and James’ role is grounded in Scripture (Matthew 1:25, 16:18–19, Acts 15) and early Christian historians (Jerome, Irenaeus).
Your mind is already made up, about James and other things, so you are not willing to try to find out why all these other people disagree with you. JUST INVESTIGATE. Don’t make up your mind, until you do.
you to investigate Matthew 16:18–19, Luke 1:34, or early Christian texts like Jerome’s Against Helvidius.
You are entitled to your opinions. I am entitled to mine. I do not agree with yours.
Excellent Post & worth repeating so that all those lurkers know that the only “work” we need to do for Eternal Salvation is to Believe in The Lord Jesus.
John 6:29
John 6:47
John 14:6
Acts 16:31
Romans 10:9-10
I sin.
I sin daily.
I will continue to sin daily until the day I die (and so will each one of you unless you want to lie about it - another sin).
All of the so-called Pastors & other Christians who claim if you sin you “lose your salvation” seem to be obstinate when it comes to this issue - they are 100% incorrect.
1 John 1:8-10
8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.
Confess it and move on - walking in Christ and the Holy Spirit.
The race is real and difficult. We have Him as our Advocate.
Romans 8:1-4 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Look at the biblical definition of belief vs. your definition.
To believe biblically you must obey. That requires work and doing what he tells you.
Religion is such a poison - deadly poison.
My gf recently converted from Roman Catholicism and is going to start going to my church.
We’re treading lightly with her family for now. I can see the light of excitement in her eyes.
I dare you to live 5 minutes without sinning.
You can’t unless you are dead.
And I quoted several Bible verses, which are hardly “my definition”.
1 John is a great book about “works” if you are interested in working for your salvation. The daily grind of walking in Christ is to look and keep your eyes on Him.
He does all the work - not us.
Works-based Salvation is so stone age and it misses the entire point of Sanctification. Pious folks don’t need Jesus - just themselves. We’ll see how it works for them at the Great White Throne Judgement.
Indeed!
And if you really want to walk around with your chest puffed out - read Ephesians. My gosh!
I was chosen before the creation of the world!
So were you!
Imagine that!
Let’s see how many haters come in and challenge that. ;)
Glad to hear that. I left it many decades ago. 👍 You know, I live in the belly of the beast. I talk to people all the time, about true faith in the right Jesus. Remember, we must have faith in the RIGHT Jesus. 😄
The Right Jesus is...
The Alpha and The Omega
He that Lives
And was dead
He is Alive forevermore
He holds the keys of Death and Hades
All authority in Heaven and Earth is His
Every knee will bow, in Heaven & Earth and under the Earth
He is the Son of The Living God
He is the Word made Flesh
He is the Messiah
He is the King of the Jews
He is the Author of Salvation
He is the Finisher of our Faith
He is our High Priest
He is the Bread of Life
He is the Good Shepherd
He is The Way, The Truth, and The Life
This is the Right Jesus! 👍 😉
Yup.
It seems that many Catholics here don't even acknowledge them at all.
And those that do, want to gloss over them to mean something else.
Which camp are you in?
In Jewish culture, “brothers” (Greek: adelphoi) MOSTLY referred to actual brothers.
Abel did NOT kill his COUSIN!
You are correct sir.
Yet when Romes wants to claim something, then it is fine to use a multitude of weak links to forge the chain.
Another argument by assertion, using misleading, ignorant or false statements.
Your error is cherry-picking texts to fit a 16th-century invention while ignoring the Church Christ founded (Matthew 16:18).
The Catholic Gospel is salvation by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9), where baptism regenerates (John 3:5, Titus 3:5, Acts 2:38),
No, the act of baptism itself (ex opere operato) does not effect regeneration, as it is the faith which is confessed in baptism that purifies the heart, as Peter stated, (Acts 15:7-9) and thus the promise of the Spirit can made if the subjects will confess repentant faith in the Lord Jesus via baptism which signifies it. Thus the promise of Acts 2:38, and with regeneration occurring by faith prior to baptism in Acts 10:43-47.
In contrast, , as I have described elsewhere, "Rome's gospel is salvation by grace via merit, having begun with very act of baptism which (it is imagined) to effects regeneration by which one is rendered good enough to be with God," for
Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. (CCC 1992)
the formal cause of justification does not consist in an exterior imputation of the justice of Christ, but in a real, interior sanctification effected by grace... (cf. Trent, Sess. VI, cap. vii; can. xi).
Thus it is believed that the newly baptized, who are thus inwardly just, formally justified and made holy by their own personal justice and holiness, would go to be with God in Heaven if they died before they sin:
By virtue of our apostolic authority, we define the following: According to the general disposition of God, the souls of all the saints . . . and other faithful who died after receiving Christ's holy Baptism (provided they were not in need of purification when they died, . . .) have been, are and will be in heaven, in the heavenly Kingdom and celestial paradise with Christ, joined to the company of the holy angels. (CCC 1023)
And having begun salvation based upon an imagined change in character via the act itself of baptism, therefore a state after death was necessitated for those who died without being good enough to actually be with God., versus eternal life itself being a wholly non- merited gift, though the obedience of faith validates believers as being so, which God obedience rewards.
certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized , such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence. .. (CCC 1264)
Which means that unless they died having attained to the level of practical perfection needed, then they are in in need of postmortem purification commencing at death, even "through fire and torments or "purifying" punishments. (Apostolic Constitution on Indulgences, Pope Paul VI) For
And thus, what flows from the original error of believing man must actually become good enough to be with God (rather than faith being counted/imputed for righteous, - Rm. 4:5 - and with obedience and holiness being evidential fruit of regenerating faith) is that of the doctrine of RC Purgatory, by which, besides atoning for sins not sufficiently expiated on earth, serves to make the baptized good enough to be with God.
The Catholic Encyclopedia also states that St. Augustine "describes two conditions of men; "some there are who have departed this life, not so bad as to be deemed unworthy of mercy, nor so good as to be entitled to immediate happiness " etc. (City of God XXI.24.)
And thus by the close of the fourth century was taught "a place of purgation..from which when purified they "were admitted unto the Holy Mount of the Lord". For " they were "not so good as to be entitled to eternal happiness ".
One "cannot approach God till the purging fire shall have cleansed the stains with which his soul was infested." (Catholic Encyclopedia>Purgatory)
All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven. (CCC 1030)
"The purpose of purgatory is to bring you up the level of spiritual excellence needed to experience the full-force presence of God." (Jimmy Akin, How to Explain Purgatory to Protestants).
"Every trace of attachment to evil must be eliminated, every imperfection of the soul corrected." Purification must be complete..." "This is exactly what takes place in Purgatory." — John Paul II, Audiences, 1999; http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/audiences/1999/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_04081999.html
Catholic professor Peter Kreeft states,
"...we will go to Purgatory first, and then to Heaven after we are purged of all selfishness and bad habits and character faults." Peter Kreeft, Because God Is Real: Sixteen Questions, One Answer, p. 224
However, this premise of perfection of character for final salvation eliminates the newly baptized from entering Heaven (if they died before they sinned), since while innocent (not that the act of baptism actually regenerates, as Catholicism teaches), yet they have not yet attained to "spiritual excellence," to elmination of "every trace of attachment to evil," to "perfection of the soul," to the level of practical holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
And this premise would also exclude the contrite criminal of Luke 23:43 from being with Christ at death, yet who was told by the Lord that he would be with Christ in Paradise that day. And likewise imperfect Paul, (Philippians 3:13) who attested that to be absent from the body was to be present with the Lord. (2 Corinthians 5:7; cf. Philippians 1:23) And indeed it would exclude all believers who were told that they would be forever with the Lord if He returned in their lifetime (1 This. 4:17) though they were still undergoing growth in grace, as was Paul.
In contrast, wherever Scripture clearly speak of the next conscious reality for believers then it is with the Lord, (Lk. 23:43 [cf. 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 2:7]; Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17)
And rather than Purgatory conforming souls to Christ to inherit the kingdom of God, the next transformative experience that is manifestly taught is that of being made like Christ in the resurrection. (1Jn. 3:2; Rm. 8:23; 1Co 15:53,54; 2Co. 2-4) At which time is the judgment seat of Christ And which is the only suffering after this life, which does not begin at death, but awaits the Lord's return, (1 Corinthians 4:5; 2 Timothy. 4:1,8; Revelation 11:18; Matthew 25:31-46; 1 Peter 1:7; 5:4) and is the suffering of the loss of rewards (and the Lord's displeasure!) due to the manner of material one built the church with. But which one is saved despite the loss of such, not because of. (1 Corinthians 3:8ff)
. Merit is God's grace rewarding His own work in us (Philippians 2:13),
Which I affirmed, as I also said, (which includes "while eternal life itself is a gift, [Rm. 6:23] God, under no obligation, benevolently rewards the obedience of faith, (Heb. 10:35; 1 Co. 3; Revelation 11:18) though He alone is worthy of any credit for everything from the motivation to be saved, and to serve Him, and the ability to do both. We can and must only take credit for resisting Him.""
not earning salvation.
And I myself have provided,
"With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man," "the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit." (CCC 2007-2008)d.
However, by teaching salvation, and not just rewards for service, is, as I have said, is "salvation by grace thru merit," for by beginning with salvation being by a pure act of grace (the act of baptism=regeneration=salvific sanctification, and then of meriting eternal life it by meritorious acts of obedience, but (usually) via postmortem purification to enable souls to become good enough to actually enter Heaven, then you not only have souls who imagine that they are children of God though a ritual, but they also imagine that they are (or will actually become) good enough to be with God. Play now, pay later.
You deny regeneration by baptism, claiming it’s by faith alone (Acts 10:43–47). But Acts 10:47 shows Cornelius received the Spirit before baptism, yet was baptized (Acts 2:38,
Which supposed refutation only affirms what I said, that regeneration was by faith which preceded baptism, as Luke records, as Peter himself stated, with faith being what purified that heart. (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9)
“Repent and be baptized… for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”).
Which Rome does not obey, as repentance and whole-hearted faith is required for baptism. (Acts 2:38; 8:36,37)
Baptism regenerates (Titus 3:5, “washing of regeneration”), as Peter taught (1 Peter 3:21). The error is separating faith from baptism, ignoring NT unity (Mark 16:16, Galatians 3:27).<
No, the washing of regeneration is not physical, by that of God "purifying their hearts by faith," (Acts 15:9, preceding baptism) which valid baptism requires and confesses, (Acts 2:38) thus the event is referred to as signifying this. (Rm. 6; Galatians 3:27; 1 Peter 3:21)
For as I stated, faith and works of faith go together, as Cause and Effect (all we choose to do is a result of what we truly believe - at least at the moment), and thus to promise the Holy Spirit to a multitude if they will repent and believe [Acts 2:38] on the risen Lord Jesus, is in effect, a promise of the Spirit if they will believe, since baptism to them would be a confession of faith (in body language).
Likewise the Lord Jesus stated: "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 be forgiven would effect healing, thus the command to walk meant be forgiven/healed, the two going together.
However, the effects (which vindicate/justify one as being a believer) must never be confused with the Cause of justification, which is faith/confidence/reliance upon the Lord Jesus to save you as a damned and salvifically destitute sinner, on His account.
Trent teaches merit as God crowning His gifts (Ephesians 2:10, “created in Christ Jesus for good works”). Justification is by grace (Romans 5:1), with works as fruit (James 2:24, “justified by works and not by faith alone”). Your site ignores Trent’s condemnation of Pelagianism (salvation by works alone). The error is misreading Trent as Pelagian, ignoring Scripture’s harmony of faith and works (Matthew 25:31–46, Hebrews 6:10).
To the contrary, as seen in multitudes of my posts, I indisputably affirm that faith and works of faith go together, as Cause and Effect but which must never be confused with the Cause of conversionary justification.
However, Rome has souls be justified by a act of pure grace via baptism, then not simply meriting rewards at the judgment seat of Christ, but the gift of eternal life via merit:
"Although the sinner is justified by the justice of Christ, inasmuch as the Redeemer has merited for him the grace of justification (causa meritoria), nevertheless he is formally justified and made holy by his own personal justice and holiness (causa formalis).” (Catholic Encyclopedia>Sanctifying Grace)"If anyone says...that the one justified by the good works that he performs by the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, does not truly merit...the attainment of eternal life itself and also an increase of glory, let him be anathema." (Trent, Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 32.
"nothing further is wanting to the justified [baptized and faithful], to prevent their being accounted to have, by those very works which have been done in God, fully satisfied the divine law according to the state of this life, and to have truly merited eternal life." (Trent, Chapter XVI; The Sixth Session Decree on justification, 1547)
"nothing further is wanting to the justified [baptized and faithful], to prevent their being accounted to have, by those very works which have been done in God, fully satisfied the divine law according to the state of this life, and to have truly merited eternal life." (Trent, Chapter XVI; The Sixth Session Decree on justification, 1547)Your error is antinomianism, ignoring that faith without works is dead (James 2:26).
Which argument by fallacious assertion only reveals your ignorance, or deception. Why should i spend more time exposing more of the same, when others need help?
You link to a site critiquing the Catholic Eucharist as unscriptural transubstantiation, claiming metaphorical interpretation. But Jesus says “This is my body” (Luke 22:19, Greek estin = real presence), and Paul warns of profaning the Body (1 Corinthians 11:27–29). The site’s “metaphorical” view ignores John 6:55 (“My flesh is true food”), early Christians like Ignatius (Smyrnaeans 6:2, “the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior”), and the NT sacrifice (Hebrews 13:10). The error is reducing the Eucharist to a memorial, ignoring its sacramental reality (1 Corinthians 10:16).
Which page of mine extensively refutes, per usual.
your arguments and links distort Catholic teaching and Scripture, promoting a deformed gospel that severs faith from works, tradition from Scripture, and the Church from Christ’s promise (Matthew 16:18). The early Church was Catholic in belief and practice
More delusional assertions.
You call Scripture the “only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record” of NT belief. But Scripture itself affirms oral tradition (2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Timothy 2:2), and the NT Church discerned truth through councils (Acts 15:28, “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us”). The Bible doesn’t claim to be the sole rule (John 21:25), and the canon was determined by the Church (Council of Rome, 382 AD). Your view contradicts the apostles, who taught orally (Acts 20:35).
Which assertion is repeated despite the fact that, as you have been told before, men such as the apostles could speak as wholly inspired of God and also provide new public revelation thereby (in conflation with what had been written), neither of popes and councils claim to do in defining dogma. Nor is ensured perpetual magisterial veracity promised or examples in Scripture (and Caiaphas does not example this). Thus the written word is the assured infallible word of God. and your view contradicts the apostles who could speak as wholly inspired of God,
Meanwhile, you should know by now that the canon was not settle by the Church as per the disputed claim of the Council of Rome, 382 AD. For contrary to propaganda and ignorance or denial of history. In reality, scholarly disagreements over the canonicity (proper) of certain books continued down through the centuries and right into Trent, until it provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon — after the death of Luther. Thus Luther was no maverick in this issue, which was not part of his excommunication by Rome, but had substantial RC support for his non-binding personal opinion (as he expressed it was) on the canon, being just one of many Catholic scholars to express doubt or disagreement before Trent. See Luther and the Canon of Scripture for more.
* And rather than Rome being necessary to know what is of God, an authoritative body of wholly inspired Scripture had been established by the time of Christ, as manifest by the frequent appeals to Scripture, including "He expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Luke 24:27) And writings of which provided the prophetic and doctrinal epistemological foundation for the church, thus scripture and recognition of it preceded the church.
Moreover, you can only wish the NT church of Scripture was Catholic, and we need men such as James (who provided the conclusive judgment, confirmatory of Peter, Paul and Barnabas in your sited proof text), while John 21:25 simply refers to the vast amount of other works that the Lord did, yet John points to what is written as being what is provided for salvation:
And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. (John 20:30-31)The error is sola scriptura, a 16th century invention not in Scripture, leading to division (2 Peter 3:16 warns of twisting Scripture).
More abuse of Scripture, which is what 2 Peter 3:16 warns of, not that of its status, while division is not restricted to reliance upon Scripture, but to sola ecclesia as well, as is well manifest in your org, Catholicism is an amalgamation of liberals and conservatives, and of conflicting interpretations of what valid church teaching is and means, and far less unified in than those who have most strongly esteemed Scripture as the accurate and wholly inspired word of God, which Catholics attack as a basis for unity
the links you provided (peacebyjesus.net) with its false claims are a masterclass in distortion, Those links are a house of cards—biased, selective, and ignorant of the early Church’s Catholicity.
More recourse to bombastic fallacious accusations, in lieu of actually valid arguments.
They reject the Church Christ founded (Matthew 16:18), l
Which is more parroting of refuted propaganda, which once again renders you unworthy of my hours of productive service, of which this reply has taken over two hours of. In which you are simply reiterating previously refuting parroting of RC propaganda, Thus, once again, I will refer previous responses to you for any who are yet interested on this, while my condescension in even replying here is a solitary act of grace.
You yourself are fit to be ignored as one who has been refuted numerous times, yet who persists in abuse of Scripture, forcing it to support RC propaganda. Such as flows from idolatry, that of making your self-proclaimed one true church" an object of faith, security, and supreme allegiance.
May God have mercy on you, and grant you “repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.” (2 Timothy 2:25)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2956727/posts?page=71#71
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2956727/posts?page=72#72
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2956727/posts?page=94#94
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=304#304
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=305#305
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=388#388
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=390#390
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=399#399
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2977809/posts?page=13#13
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2978293/posts?page=94#94
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3642361/posts?page=76#76
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3642361/posts?page=93#93
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3657720/posts?page=22#22
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=262#262
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=25#25
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=44#44
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3807967/posts?page=23#23
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3778446/posts?page=31#31
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3774892/posts?page=133#133
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=270#270
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=226#226
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=224#224
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=166#166
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=70#70
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=56#56
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=55#55
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=52#52
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=25#25
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=419#419
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=444#444
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=446#446
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=447#447
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=448#448
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=45#45
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4065274/posts?page=6#6
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4048660/posts?page=83#83
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4048660/posts?page=84#84
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4048660/posts?page=63#63
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4022542/posts?page=45#45
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4022542/posts?page=46#46
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4022542/posts?page=48#48
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3998425/posts?page=2#2
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3987872/posts?page=9#9
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3982118/posts?page=292#292
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3979325/posts?page=45#45
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3898110/posts?page=81#81
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3890052/posts?page=31#31
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3885281/posts?page=30#30
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3884071/posts?page=12#12
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3819041/posts?page=349#349
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3819041/posts?page=347#347
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3878575/posts?page=13#13
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3861195/posts?page=6#6
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3813139/posts?page=153#153
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=160#160
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=162#162
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=76#76
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=44#44
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=45#45
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4065274/posts?page=6#6
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4126425/posts?page=32#32
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4222270/posts?page=18#18
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4181595/posts?page=440#440
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4126425/posts?page=32#32
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4309249/posts?page=45#45
...is NOTgrounded in Scripture.
The Roman Catholic Church has turned the beautiful, blessed lady of Scripture into an asexual, frigid Jewish wife; who withheld her favors from Joseph for no rational reason. 1 Corinthians 7:1-40 ESV... each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. |
I have few opinions.
Most of my BELIEFS come from an understanding of language.
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.