2Cor 6:14 Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?
2Cor 6:15 Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?
2Cor 6:16 Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, "I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
2Cor 6:17 "Therefore, COME OUT FROM THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE," says the Lord. "AND DO NOT TOUCH WHAT IS UNCLEAN; And I will welcome you.
1Cor 15:33 Do not be deceived: "Bad company corrupts good morals."
Could you possibly then explain to me what a Catholic believes about how one is (gets) saved?
Meaning... if we were in conversation and the topic of salvation came up, how would you explain to me the Catholic belief about how salvation is obtained?
I'm not Catholic, but I'm pretty sure I understand the Catholic belief about salvation. Perhaps, though, I'm wrong. So if you could post something substantive that describes the Catholic beliefs about salvation it might help the conversation. And something like "the same way all Christians get saved," or "the way Protestants get saved" wouldn't be helpful. So think of me as a Hindu or Buddhist and then tell me how to get saved from the Catholic perspective as you understand it.
Baptism, Confirmation, and Eucharist are the three sacraments of Christian initiation, which are considered to be the foundation of Christian life.
Baptism: is believed to be the means by which a person is spiritually reborn. According to Catholic teaching, when a person is baptized, they are cleansed of original sin, initiated into the Church, and receive the grace of the Holy Spirit. This is seen as a form of spiritual rebirth and a new beginning in one's relationship with God.
Confirmation: The sacrament of confirmation strengthens the faithful.
Eucharist: The sacrament of Eucharist, also known as Holy Communion, provides the faithful with the food of eternal life
---------------------------
Catholics do believe in a concept similar to "being born again," but it is understood differently than in many Protestant traditions. In Catholicism, the idea of being "born again" is tied to the sacrament of Baptism.
However, Catholics do not typically use the phrase "born again" in the same way that many evangelical Protestants do. Evangelical Protestants often associate being "born again" with a personal, conscious decision to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, accompanied by a transformative spiritual experience. Catholics, on the other hand, emphasize that the rebirth through Baptism is a sacramental act that is foundational to the Christian life, but the ongoing process of spiritual renewal and growth happens throughout one's life, particularly through participation in the sacraments (such as the Eucharist and Reconciliation) and through living out one's faith.
In summary, Catholics believe in a form of being "born again" through Baptism, but they view it as part of a lifelong journey of faith and spiritual growth rather than a one-time event or experience
Thank you KJ. We can use this as a starting point.
As I understand it (and I've read quite a lot of newadvent.org), the Church (meaning the Catholic church, whether Roman or Orthodox or Oriental) ... the Church exists to administer the seven sacraments to fallen humanity.
Salvation is conferred upon a person by their participation in the rite of baptism. Such baptism (as I'm sure you know), is typically performed on an infant and is believed to wash away Original Sin and hence "saves" him or her. Of course one is to continue one's participation in the sacramental rituals so that one does not become apostate.
Baptism as a Catholic sacrament, then, is a critical doctrine that rejects the entire Protestant "Faith Alone" or "Just Believe !!" basis for salvation. This is what led me to say:
To sum up then, I can see no path forward to reconcile the Protestant Doctrine of Salvation by Sola Gratia/Fide with the Catholic Doctrine of Salvation by Sacramental Baptism.
In his "mission" to reform the Church, Luther ultimately eliminated four of the seven sacraments, keeping only three (the three you mentioned), and even these were finally dispensed with over the following decades as various Protestant interpretations (including Calvinism) were developed. Let me know if this helps to clarify my views.
Finally, as an FYI, I no longer use the term "born again," in that the literal translation of the Greek phrase is "Born from the Beginning." I guess I should also mention that I do not believe that either of the Protestant or Catholic doctrines of salvation are right, but we can address that a later time if the need arises.
Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
Rom. 3:28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.
Rom. 5:1 Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.
These are thanks to Open Bible and What Does the Bible Say About Justification By Faith Alone? is the address to 97 more scripture references for being Saved By Faith alone. It would help if you had a couple of decades of Spirit-led study, neighbor.
Salvation is conferred upon a person by their participation in the rite of baptism. Such baptism (as I'm sure you know), is typically performed on an infant and is believed to wash away Original Sin and hence "saves" him or her. Of course one is to continue one's participation in the sacramental rituals so that one does not become apostate.
Not correct. Salvation is seen as a lifelong process. Baptism is not always only of infants. Members of the church would baptise their infants. New members would get baptised when they join.
Now, on face value it appears odd to baptise an infant as an infant cannot make a decision to accept or reject Jesus. But you have to try understand that an infant is to grow up in the church and be taught about Jesus. As such they won't but be a 'Christian' into their youth and adulthood. Think on that. They enter adulthood as a Christian.
Now since salvation is a lifelong process, they have every day as an adult to make a decision to stay or move away from Jesus. This type of belief is 100% on par with all Protestants who believe you can lose your salvation. How is it any different? OSAS believers are always arguing a works-based salvation with non-OSAS believers.
I don't have a material disagreement with any of this. It is a good practice.
My only disagreement comes in with me being an OSAS believer who believes that only when we reach an age of accountability (20) can we truly make a decision to accept or reject Jesus.
Protestant churches that teach you must be born again at 12 + for me are no different to baptism of an infant. You are still naive, young and ignorant at 12. 0 - 19, it is good to be taught and learn about Jesus, but I don't believe there can be any true 'rebirth' at these ages. For me all in this age group are sanctified only.
Baptism as a Catholic sacrament, then, is a critical doctrine that rejects the entire Protestant "Faith Alone" or "Just Believe !!" basis for salvation. This is what led me to say:
And why I had asked you to sum up the Catholic belief on how one "gets saved," because there is disagreement on that.
You are coming unstuck on the word 'sacrament'. Ignore that for a moment.
Think of a protestant church that baptises infants and teaches the importance of breaking of bread / communion. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this and these practices do not bypass 'needing faith'. You break bread believing in a Being you cannot see. Believing He died on the cross for you 2000 years ago. Faith is part and parcel of your daily walk. The very reason you attend meetings / are a member of the church.
You cannot imply a 'works' based salvation because they take communion seriously. Protestants who believe in non-OSAS will have identical concerns if you stopped attending meetings and breaking of bread sessions. Forgivably so.
To sum up then, I can see no path forward to reconcile the Protestant Doctrine of Salvation by Sola Gratia/Fide with the Catholic Doctrine of Salvation by Sacramental Baptism.
All Protestants who believe you can lose your salvation are 100% in the same boat as Catholics. Zero difference.
You are coming unstuck on faith, original sin and baptism. I hope I have been clear in explaining that there is no difference between the Catholic church and all Protestant churches who believe you can lose your salvation. What you need to research is why Protestant churches teach you can lose your salvation. Why would one stop taking part in communion?
In his "mission" to reform the Church, Luther ultimately eliminated four of the seven sacraments, keeping only three (the three you mentioned), and even these were finally dispensed with over the following decades as various Protestant interpretations (including Calvinism) were developed. Let me know if this helps to clarify my views.
1. Baptism.
2. Eucharist.
3. Confirmation.
4. Reconciliation.
5. Anointing of the sick.
6. Marriage.
7. Holy orders.
You are coming unstuck on the word 'sacraments'. Which item here do you disagree on?
As relates to 'Christian initiation', there are only three sacraments. It has always been that way. As for the others, are you saying that Luther stopped teaching the importance of marriage? Not sure I am following you.
Please lets also not start another discussion on Calvinism!!!!
Finally, as an FYI, I no longer use the term "born again," in that the literal translation of the Greek phrase is "Born from the Beginning." I guess I should also mention that I do not believe that either of the Protestant or Catholic doctrines of salvation are right, but we can address that a later time if the need arises.
These are thanks to Open Bible and What Does the Bible Say About Justification By Faith Alone? is the address to 97 more scripture references for being Saved By Faith alone. It would help if you had a couple of decades of Spirit-led study, neighbor.
Don't be so condescending, Bill. I never said that the Catholics were right. I merely noted that the Protestant and Catholic could never be reconciled on matters of how one gets saved. That said, the Church has been around for nearly 2,000 years, while Protestant doctrines are what, a measly 500 years old?
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
(James 2:24 KJV)
I wonder why your "Spirit-led study" missed the above verse.
And NO, I don't need knee-jerk BS reactions typically vomited up by the conservative Protestant who can't think their way out of a paper bag. If I had my druthers, I'd Acts 18:26 your hide, but it would no doubt be to no avail.
Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
Rom. 3:28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.
Rom. 5:1 Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.
These are thanks to Open Bible and What Does the Bible Say About Justification By Faith Alone? is the address to 97 more scripture references for being Saved By Faith alone. It would help if you had a couple of decades of Spirit-led study, neighbor.
I'm sure you meant to add... "by the Catholics." But by their own encyclopedia, nothing is mentioned about any "lifelong process."
Individual salvation
The Council of Trent describes the process of salvation from sin in the case of an adult with great minuteness (Sess. VI, v-vi).
It begins with the grace of God which touches a sinner's heart, and calls him to repentance. This grace cannot be merited; it proceeds solely from the love and mercy of God. Man may receive or reject this inspiration of God, he may turn to God or remain in sin. Grace does not constrain man's free will.
Thus assisted the sinner is disposed for salvation from sin; he believes in the revelation and promises of God, he fears God'sjustice, hopes in his mercy, trusts that God will be merciful to him for Christ's sake, begins to loveGod as the source of all justice, hates and detests his sins.
This disposition is followed by justification itself, which consists not in the mere remission of sins, but in the sanctification and renewal of the inner man by the voluntary reception of God'sgrace and gifts, whence a man becomes just instead of unjust, a friend instead of a foe and so an heir according to hope of eternal life. This change happens either by reason of a perfect act of charity elicited by a well disposed sinner or by virtue of the Sacrament either of Baptism or of Penance according to the condition of the respective subject laden with sin. The Council further indicates the causes of this change. By the merit of the Most Holy Passion through the Holy Spirit, the charity of God is shed abroad in the hearts of those who are justified.
Salvation has in Scriptural language the general meaning of liberation from straitened circumstances or from other evils, and of a translation into a state of freedom and security
Only to a Protestant. According to the Catholic it is the Sacrament of Baptism that Confers Salvation (cf. above). There is no "decision to accept or reject Jesus" as the Protestant understands it within the framework of the Catholic doctrine of Soteriology.
My only disagreement comes in with me being an OSAS believer who believes that only when we reach an age of accountability (20) can we truly make a decision to accept or reject Jesus.
As requested, I set forth my reasons why the Protestant and Catholic doctrine of Soteriology cannot be reconciled; and now you want to rabbit trail down into what you believe. No thanks, I think I'll avoid that discussion, save for noting that I guess y'all grow up more slowly over there. The Baptists in America usually quote an age of 13.
To the Catholic Church, though, your belief is irrelevant. To the Catholic, Salvation is typically conferred upon a person by participation in the Sacrament of Baptism. And if not Baptism, then Penance, or else this thing they call "a perfect act of charity."
The only reason I'm in this conversation is to provide support for saying, "The key doctrine of Christianity is how one gets saved, and there just will be no reconciliation on that doctrine" (between the Protestant and Catholic).
And by now, you ought to have figured out what you were missing.
I hope I have been clear in explaining that there is no difference between the Catholic church and all Protestant churches who believe you can lose your salvation
I'm sure you meant to add... "by the Catholics." But by their own encyclopedia, nothing is mentioned about any "lifelong process."
Individual salvation
The Council of Trent describes the process of salvation from sin in the case of an adult with great minuteness (Sess. VI, v-vi).
It begins with the grace of God which touches a sinner's heart, and calls him to repentance. This grace cannot be merited; it proceeds solely from the love and mercy of God. Man may receive or reject this inspiration of God, he may turn to God or remain in sin. Grace does not constrain man's free will.
Thus assisted the sinner is disposed for salvation from sin; he believes in the revelation and promises of God, he fears God'sjustice, hopes in his mercy, trusts that God will be merciful to him for Christ's sake, begins to loveGod as the source of all justice, hates and detests his sins.
This disposition is followed by justification itself, which consists not in the mere remission of sins, but in the sanctification and renewal of the inner man by the voluntary reception of God'sgrace and gifts, whence a man becomes just instead of unjust, a friend instead of a foe and so an heir according to hope of eternal life. This change happens either by reason of a perfect act of charity elicited by a well disposed sinner or by virtue of the Sacrament either of Baptism or of Penance according to the condition of the respective subject laden with sin. The Council further indicates the causes of this change. By the merit of the Most Holy Passion through the Holy Spirit, the charity of God is shed abroad in the hearts of those who are justified.
Salvation has in Scriptural language the general meaning of liberation from straitened circumstances or from other evils, and of a translation into a state of freedom and security
Only to a Protestant. According to the Catholic it is the Sacrament of Baptism that Confers Salvation (cf. above). There is no "decision to accept or reject Jesus" as the Protestant understands it within the framework of the Catholic doctrine of Soteriology.
My belief, what is painfully logical, sheds light on the similarity to the other two. I would think that be obvious from what I typed. Unfortunately, you read a post, any post, with a prejudice and as though it is a personal attack on you.
As requested, I set forth my reasons why the Protestant and Catholic doctrine of Soteriology cannot be reconciled; and now you want to rabbit trail down into what you believe. No thanks, I think I'll avoid that discussion, save for noting that I guess y'all grow up more slowly over there. The Baptists in America usually quote an age of 13.
No Rabbit trail. Explain the difference between Protestants who believe non-OSAS and what Catholics teach. You ARE getting LOST with the word ''''sacrament'''.
To the Catholic Church, though, your belief is irrelevant. To the Catholic, Salvation is typically conferred upon a person by participation in the Sacrament of Baptism. And if not Baptism, then Penance, or else this thing they call "a perfect act of charity."
Now I rather think that you lost track of the topic here. I had made this comment:
To which you replied:
The only reason I'm in this conversation is to provide support for saying, "The key doctrine of Christianity is how one gets saved, and there just will be no reconciliation on that doctrine" (between the Protestant and Catholic).
And by now, you ought to have figured out what you were missing.
The discussion was about Catholic belief. They use the word Sacrament. It's pretty much a no brainer, so you ought to have been able to understand it. My apologies for the presumption.
"The Bible in no way envisages the organization of the church into denominations. It instead assumes the opposite, that all Christians, except those being disciplined, will be in full fellowship with all others. Any tendencies to the contrary were roundly denounced (1 Cor.1:10-13). Paul could write a letter to the Christians meeting in various places in Rome or Galatia with every assurance that all would receive its message. Today, for any city or country, he would have to place the letter as an advertisement in the secular media and hope." Elwell’s Evangelistic Dictionary of Theology, (1984), page 310
I would offer since we are freely given the faithful understanding of God not seen as the power to both heardo it as it to his good pleasure (To will and do Philippians 2:13 )
Because of his finished work and it was God alone good there must be heresies, divisions as denominations.
Families, where two or three gather under the authority of sola scriptura (all things written in the law and prophets )The sword that defends us shield us from doctrines as heresies of dying mankind we defend it as it is written
In that way there can be differences in opinions oral traditions. Christmas tree or no tree. Color eggs or no egg. water baptism or Holy Spirit baptism .As long as they do not do despite to the fullness of Grace the full wage of sin..
Some say the queen mother called the strange women (not the bride of Christ) alone did reeve the fulness of grace .. . Purgatory Limbo for the rest of the human race.
Some say the Queen mother even visits the Protestants and comforts all.
1 Corinthians 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
2 Peter 2:1But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
Not all oral traditons (heresies) are damnable . .
You might think it's worthless.
Same goes for the someone else if they quit on your argument. You've no standing on mine or anyone else's if you disagree and stamp it with "worthless and not worth my time".
You might think it's worthless.
Same goes for the someone else if they quit on your argument. You've no standing on mine or anyone else's if you disagree and stamp it with "worthless and not worth my time".
I'm now supposed to "fight" with a rando video on YouTube?
That's like screaming at the television when you disagree with what a commentator says.
And yes, if someone quits on my arguments, that doesn't faze me in the slightest, even if no sufficient reason is ever presented. (There usually isn't.) And if someone clicks off a YouTube video that I've made, why should that bother me?
How the heck can you get offended when I make an informed critique on a rando video claiming to teach people? And yes, I'm offended when people try to teach others when they are clearly unqualified to do so.
I would suggest you re-evaluate how you value your time. You might find you waste less of it.
Dare I point out that this statement doesn't make sense? If you are referencing the legal concept of "standing" then one ought to have said, "You've no standing with me."
Clarify or not. Your choice.
But unless you created the video, I've already rendered my informed opinion on it.
Don't be so condescending, Bill. I never said that the Catholics were right. I merely noted that the Protestant and Catholic could never be reconciled on matters of how one gets saved. That said, the Church has been around for nearly 2,000 years, while Protestant doctrines are what, a measly 500 years old?
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
(James 2:24 KJV)
I wonder why your "Spirit-led study" missed the above verse.
And NO, I don't need knee-jerk BS reactions typically vomited up by the conservative Protestant who can't think their way out of a paper bag. If I had my druthers, I'd Acts 18:26 your hide, but it would no doubt be to no avail.
I was pointing out that what I gleened from your post was not true, that is not condescending when the evidence is clearly displayed. You, on the other hand have a mean spirit that is not from the God I serve and you are being condescending and moving the grounds markers to justify you modifying the subject matter. Praying for you.
Egads, Bill, I wasn't posting the Truth, I was posting the Catholic viewpoint. So maybe you want to clean off your gleaning glasses before stomping on people.
That may or may not be true, but your mean spirit from the God you serve is just as bad when you misunderstand something and then reply as if you have some moral high ground as God's mouthpiece. Are you a prophet perchance? (I seriously ask.)
