Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ Thought Provoking OSAS

[Reuben]

Again I find myself defending something I have no desire to defend.

A humble man would eventually ask himself why this keeps happening. Kind of obvious isn't it?

[Justaned]

its the sacraments that's saves

As I continue to look over what you said; I'm seeing that it boils down to this. Their faith is in something other than Jesus Christ. Here again the question must be posed - How is a person saved who truly believes in and follows the Catholic teaching?

Again I find myself defending something I have no desire to defend. Is their faith in sacraments or is it in things Jesus ordained both in scripture and through the disciples and in which they believe Jesus is manifested in? For instance Catholics believe Christ manifests Himself in the sacrament of communion.

No serious Catholic believes in salvation apart from Jesus Christ. I'm not talking of people that have sat down and discussed Catholicism with their father I'm talking of the Priests, theologians and those that took Catechism to learn and grow in Christ.

May I suggest that instead of seeking information from a disgruntled ex Catholic, if you really want to know, sit down and take the time to read the Catholic Catechism. By taking time I mean go to each scripture they reference and study it until you understand how the Catholics have come to the conclusion they have. I don't mean you have to agree with it, but you need to understand what they see in scripture that leads them to their belief.

I know many Catholics that claim salvation through being born again in Christ, they will further testify that did not come by chance but through the teaching they received within the Catholic church.

Again do I think Catholicism is the answer? NO! If I did I would be less than honest with myself if I did not become Catholic, would I not? And I'm not defending their religion of which I only know from second hand experience and an indepth reading of their theology, but I do know what many claim to be Catholicism is something strained and stained by the filter of Protestantism.

I read through the Catechism - I said I use it in refuting some of their own arguments. I have not sat down with disgruntled Catholics - they are ones who are quite satisfied with their religion. One who was an ex-catholic who came to our church and was a part of it simply shared with me their beliefs and of the tragic encounters his devout parents had when their other son died. Again, you are missing the point - the people of the Catholic faith are the product of their teaching.

I don't know how a Catholic can be saved if he/she adheres to Catholicism.

Thank God for Luther! If the Catholics believed in Justification by Faith then why did Luther have to refute the Catholic church on its stance? They saw Luther as a threat to their money making scam! If you have any degree of knowledge of the Reformation - you know this was the bottom line. Ignorance kept the people in bondage and enslaved it's adherents financially to the church making it a fat-cat enterprise. I am thankful I'm not Catholic but a born-again Christian!

Are you suggesting that somehow you are not a product of your Protestant teaching?

I still hold the premise held by most neutral non religious observers that Luther while well intended was in fact a pawn used by those that due to social/political aspirations desired to be free of the hold Rome held on them. We can believe the Reformation was based on religious tenets but in fact the Monarchies of Europe wanted the money being sent to Rome and the freedom from religious restraints on their personal conduct. History proves that was in fact the realized case.

Before Rome ever got the chance to sit down and address the issues Luther noted the situation had been escalated to point that genuine discussion was totally out of the question. Rome was forced to charge Luther and Luther was forced to rebut Rome and place the guilt back on Rome. It should be noted that the issues that Luther did raise were later addressed by Rome and answered by the church. In some areas significant changes were made.

The same charges of fat cat enterprises are being made today about many churches/denominations so what changed?
Nothing only the fat cat getting the money.
And I see ignorance as still holding the people to certain religious doctrines, so again what change was accomplished?
Nothing except we now have 3000-30000 different groups doing what you claim the Catholics did.

If something significant for the body of Christ came out of the Reformation it would be the seriously misunderstood tenets of Calvin's tulip of which we both agree are messed up and totally abused today.

[Justaned]

No serious Catholic believes in salvation apart from Jesus Christ. I'm not talking of people that have sat down and discussed Catholicism with their father I'm talking of the Priests, theologians and those that took Catechism to learn and grow in Christ.

How many priests do you know and have discussed this with? Or, theologians or serious Catholics? Are you implying that Rocky's father was not a serious Catholic? Or, that one of my best friends when growing up - and his parents were not either? Or, the couple that i grew very close to in our church and his family? Or, the priest that my brother had interesting conversations with?

Why is it Ed that you speak on subjects that you know little to nothing about attempting to sound as an authority and it becomes obvious to those who do?

First I have openly admitted I am no authority on Catholicism. But I do know enough to know that some of the charges level on Catholicism are false. I don't know how many Catholic Priest I have sat down and discussed this subject with over the last 40 years or so but I do know the number is more than I have fingers and toes to count them up on.

I did not mean to denigrate anyone I was simply stating I have discussed this issue with men and women that have made it a part of their life's work. I think that talks to their level of knowledge only.

[Reuben]

But I do know enough to know that some of the charges level on Catholicism are false.

What charges have I or Rocky made that are false concerning Catholicism?

[Justaned]

Again I find myself defending something I have no desire to defend.

A humble man would eventually ask himself why this keeps happening. Kind of obvious isn't it?

I think the reason is I won't anyone go unchallenged when they bring charge against any organization that isn't present to defend itself. Plus my decision making process forces me to ask on what knowledge was used by the person to make such charges.

Most of the time they reveal they hated the very process (in this case Catechism) that was put in place to teach them the truth. Likewise most of the time they reveal that they say thus and such because they weren't saved while in the organization. And the usually parrot words most often spoken by Protestants that I know have a total ignorance of the organization they are railing against.

None of these are very conclusive bits of evidence to sustain their position.

Add to that the fact that if anyone defends something like Catholicism to any degree even to the point of saying I disagree with Catholicism but that last statement was not a fact, they make themselves a target of people that have axes to grind.

[Reuben]

in fact the Monarchies of Europe wanted the money being sent to Rome and the freedom from religious restraints on their personal conduct. History proves that was in fact the realized case.

By your statement - Luther was a person used by monarchies to bring down Rome? Where did you read this historical fact that Luther was in league with them and not acting out of personal conviction? So this was a conspiracy?

[Justaned]

But I do know enough to know that some of the charges level on Catholicism are false.

What charges have I or Rocky made that are false concerning Catholicism?

That true Catholics can not be saved by their belief in Jesus Christ. What you have said in effect is there will be no Catholics in heaven. I simply don't think you know that for a fact and I will refute you for saying it as long as you say it.

[Justaned]

in fact the Monarchies of Europe wanted the money being sent to Rome and the freedom from religious restraints on their personal conduct. History proves that was in fact the realized case.

By your statement - Luther was a person used by monarchies to bring down Rome? Where did you read this historical fact that Luther was in league with them and not acting out of personal conviction? So this was a conspiracy?

Reuben read any non Protestant account of the Reformation be it secular or Catholic written and see for yourself.

[Reuben]

When does salvation take place?This may be long Because it cannot be explained like the way we understand it, But I think you will enjoy the read even though it has my bad commentary on it lol. Yeah it is skewed, in a sense its a works based salvation even initially, kind of clean the fish before you catch them mentality. Without quoting from my catechism to much, I will just give a some up on their process, because its like 10 pages long on how to become catholic. Catholics don't use the term saved its not part of their vocabulary, even though as you know the bible uses that term. It's a born again and again, but not like Dake teaches. Every time ones goes to confession the sins get exsolved then you can take the eucharius so every time you do this you are born again. There are 7 sacraments, 4 has to do with the indoctrination process. Its not like us to were it is based on faith in Jesus and all that entails. Regeneration is not part of the catholic vocabulary either. This process is what a lot of protestants are not aware of. The 4 sacraments or designed to get the convert to be catholic enough to take the Eucharist which is what the religion pretty much revolves around.
Ok here is the process in a nutshell: like I said there are 7 sacraments but 4 are directed mainly at the laymen and new converts. I will underline the sacraments. First if you are a baby, Baptism then later the classes
If you are a new convert first the classes than baptism. Because Baptism takes away the stain of original sin, but you have to wait till Easter.(I know not biblical, but remember its not sola scriptura)
Then the sacrament of Reconciliation this involves penance and confession which has three elements: conversion, confession and celebration.
Then the Eucharist, Because the sacrament of baptism and reconciliation makes you worthy enough so to speak to be able to partake of it.
Now we get to Confirmation, It is one of the three Sacraments of Initiation for Catholics. It is most often associated with the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Now after all this you repeat all except Baptism and confirmation every mass. To miss mass according to the catechism is a mortal sin because only priests can distribute the sacraments, remember its the sacraments that's saves, now a lay catholic will deny this up and down, but its is true. I know pretty confusing, now in my opinion this is almost cult like, because there is no salvation outside of the catholic church. I would be considered a heretic by the church because I know about the holy orders and the sacraments of the church but have rejected it. Catholics only believe if you don't know about all of this out of ignorance than you might can get to heaven, especially if a priest gives you the last Last Rites. If not we may have to spend time in purgatory so our works can be purified. In the catholic church purgatory is not for sinner but for those who are on there way to heaven, but are not quite good enough or have not done enough to go there or has unconfused sin. Oh, by the way the catholic church believes the convert still has a sin nature. So as you can see, are catholic really born again believers accord to what the bible teaches? To me its just empty unbiblical rituals to be blunt that cannot save a soul. I am glad that the B-I-b-l-e is a little more simplistic.
Hmmm I guess the cross was not enough. So yeah it may be a cult

Ed, what part of the above do you not believe and will defend Catholicism?

[Reuben]

in fact the Monarchies of Europe wanted the money being sent to Rome and the freedom from religious restraints on their personal conduct. History proves that was in fact the realized case.

By your statement - Luther was a person used by monarchies to bring down Rome? Where did you read this historical fact that Luther was in league with them and not acting out of personal conviction? So this was a conspiracy?

Reuben read any non Protestant account of the Reformation be it secular or Catholic written and see for yourself.

Name me a couple and do you believe this? That Luther was a part of a conspiracy?