Catholicism

Desertsrose · Apr 7, 2017

Hi Fran,

God meant for those who are born-again and have the Spirit living within to be at unity. Not an organization.

If you do some research on the early church, there were believers without the catholic church. We didn't need the catholic church at all. We already had a universal church.

If anything, the catholic church did more harm than good. Just read its history. And there were councils before the 4th century. If fact there was one in Jerusalem soon after the birth of the church.

Believers can do quite fine without institution and without tradition. The birth of the church shows us that. They met in homes and in the open air.

But I agree that the description of the birth of the RCC was a little coarse.

I have a couple of friends that were catholic. They could never go back. They even said they aren't true Christians unless by accident. One of them was so devoted to the catholic church, but when she got saved outside of it she left. They never told her about being born again. Not once.

Desertsrose · Apr 7, 2017

FranC said:

Hi Fran, The word says that God has gifted us with apostle, prophet evangelist pastor and teacher. These giftings come from the eldership. I'm not sure if theologians fit under the eldership?

Maybe they do. I'm just not sure on that. But I agree we need all of the leadership gifts because God gave them to us for a purpose. And I thank God for them. And we need all the other gifts that Paul spoke of all well.

We need to see ourselves as a whole. No one is elevated above another. Because one is gifted as helper for instance, we're to see him in a lower light that the pastor. We are all gifted from the same God and we need to love and appreciate each other without favoritism.

But we also have to remember that there are false brothers and false churches that set themselves up as being Christian. And they're not. We're told to discern and avoid those who are false.

Even theologians that may have great wisdom could be teaching heresy. So we need to discern if they're really teaching the word of God or not. Because they have a name of pastor, pope, theologian, elders whatever doesn't automatically make them a person sent by God. They could be a wolf in sheep's clothing. So checking commentaries aren't always safe without discernment. You could read 10 of them and each one might give you a different answer.

So really, the bottom line of defense is ourselves as we read and interpret scripture. Since I've been doing serious study of God's word recently, I'm learning how to study and it's been enlightening and beneficial. I'm understanding things I've never understood before. And there's not a pastor or theologian among us. Just women praying and seeking God's word and allowing the Holy Spirit to lead us and guide us.

And consider also that the early church had the Old Testament only. And they didn't have seminaries at the time or theologians. They had Holy Spirit filled leaders that spent time with Jesus.

Desertsrose · Apr 7, 2017

FranC said:

Yes, the apostles were given authority and responsibility to teach, rebuke, exhort and train in righteousness. So when church discipline comes into play which we sorely don't apply anymore, within the context of the whole church they were to forgive sins when the person repents.

We see an example of this in 1 Corinthian 5 where the people gave forgiveness of sin when they should not have.

So Paul tells them this person needs to repent of his sin and if not he's to be expelled from the church out of love for his soul that he might repent.

Paul is telling them to hold back on the forgiveness until this person asks for forgiveness with the fruit of repentance.

The apostles don't have this ability to forgive sin in a vacuum. They themselves are to be help to the fire themselves if they sin. Paul rebuked Peter for his sin in front of a crowd because at one point he was being influenced by Judiazers.

And also, I'm able to forgive sin when someone sins against me. I don't need a leader of the church to do so. The leaders were to equip the saints for the work of ministry. That means that they instruct and teach when it's proper to forgive and not forgive like in the example above.

We're all a body working together for the will of God and to love one another and go out and save others and bring them into the kingdom.

The leaders of the church are not the type of leaders we see in the world where they Lord it over one another. We are all to submit to one another in brotherly love and not think of ourselves as better or higher than the other. We all use our giftings as a whole to build up the church and to edify the church.

kaylagrl · Apr 7, 2017

FranC said:

I Cor.

3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Reading the verses before tells you what is being spoken of. Paul and Apollos, the people were choosing one over the other Paul says. He says this is carnal thinking as we are a body of believers that work together and one is not above another. Then their works would be tested by fire,whether they were done for His glory or their own.

2 Tim.

3 Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier. 5 Also if anyone competes as an athlete, he [b]does not win the prize unless he competes according to the rules. 6 The hard-working farmer ought to be the first to receive his share of the crops. 7 Consider what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.
8 Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descendant of David, according to my gospel, 9 [c]for which I suffer hardship even to imprisonment as a criminal; but the word of God is not imprisoned.10 For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory. 11 It is a trustworthy statement:
For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;
12 If we endure, we will also reign with Him;
If we [d]deny Him, He also will deny us;
13 If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.

I'd say its pretty straight forward what is being said here. If we die,we live,if we run the race we will reign with Him.If we deny Him before men he will deny us. And if we are faithless he remains faithful to us. And I dont see where any of the verses are conflicting.

Eph. 1

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus [a]by the will of God,
To the saints who are at Ephesus and who are faithful in Christ Jesus: 2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

What am I missing here? He tells who he is speaking to.

Rockrz · Apr 7, 2017

When we follow extra biblical teachings... we take the "intellectual, I'm smarter than you" path.

You're not really standing up for priests being able to supposedly forgive sin are you?

They do not represent the Lord Jesus Christ in any way, shape, or form.

Demi777 · Apr 9, 2017

Once again people defending unrighteousness in Christ name. Ouch I bet ya might wanna tell that the priest too..
Good grief how can people take the bible so out of context. Is this even real
Forgiving of sins through confessions through a priest is simply unbiblical. The bible is the Word of God and only that is of power. Not the words of a priest, not crawling around the church singing ave maria... The word of God alone is what matters. and things we dont understand we can get help from the Holy Spirit.

Someone who doesnt believe in the Word of God is not a believer. And when you defend unbiblical stances even when people try to help you, lead you and show you by the truth, your a fool and just plain ignorant.

Proverbs 12:1
[FONT=&quot]12 Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I believe we should pray for the deceived. The Catholic Church is evil. Most of us know it. It is the whore of Babylon and many are deceived by it. Dont hate the deceived. Just pray for them. When they have an unteachable spirit, dont argue..it wont help. Lets just commit them to God. He is the only one who can help them.

Now I'll get to some bible verses here to make some things clear that are false and keeps getting protected by our catholics here.

James 5:16
Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

Yes you see that right.. It does not say ''that ye may be forgiven" it says its that your going to be healed. This is inner healing and has nothing to do with forgiveness from our God.

Which brings me to the next point. Theres no mediator between God and man besides Jesus. We dont have Mary or a priest. We confess to Jesus. He is the only way and the only one.

1 Timothy 2:5-6
For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus,who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time.[/FONT]

John 14:6
Jesus told him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.

[FONT=Arimo, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So only through Christ, not some Bishop or whatever, we come to the father and claim forgiveness for our sins. I dont think I gotta get started on the Idol worship and the Necromancy of the RCC. WIth that being said..I hope I didnt forget anything so far

God bless you all and have a nice Sunday

[/FONT]

mj007 · Apr 9, 2017

We are all a part of everything, we don't need to see ourselves as so separate from each other, separate from God, separate from Jesus. If you inspire someone to find God, or inspire someone to pray for forgiveness or repent of their sins, then you have been instrumental in the forgiveness which is given to them, God has worked through you.

We are all one. If we are not we are divided. And only a divided mind thinks about division of thought, division of religion, different perspectives on God, when really, all religions are fractures of the truth. While Catholicism has good things about it, so do other divisions of Christianity. But then so do 'root' divisions which take the form of different religions, have truth in them.

We might read a book written by some unknown author, and it inspired us to go do something great. Maybe it was a biography maybe it was science fiction. Everything is one. We don't condemn random books though because they are not the Bible, do we? But so easily, does a person condemn other religions. The truth is within, God is all-knowing, we are a part of God, the kingdom of heaven is within, and God is love.

Jesus is my religion, other than that I don't really follow any divisional belief system of Christianity, but I was brought up Roman Catholic. You have to make up your own mind, or you might be listening to false teachers of high standing (doesn't make them the truth).

kaylagrl · Apr 9, 2017

The problem with the world today,and Christians are now following this idea,is that truth is relative.You can find truth everywhere and in every religion. This is not what the Bible teaches. If all truth is relative then nothing is truth. The Bible has stood the test of time for a reason.It is Gods infallible,unchanging Word to us. It is THE truth not a truth. His Words are our daily bread,they give life,they teach us and bring us into a right relationship with God. There is no other way to be saved,no other truth that will get you to heaven. We dont need any other belief but what is in the Word. We dont need a priest between us and God. Jesus is our perfect,sinless high priest. Anyone who rejects the Bible as the only authority for the Christian to live by is believing a false man made doctrine.

17Bees · Apr 9, 2017

kaylagrl said:

I think everyone would agree with you, but I think it's because these are mostly platitudes. I mean, everyone - no matter their religion - would say their religion is true and I think Scripture is true. But to say the bible is
unchanging is simply not true. It has changed. To say we don't need anyone with any kind of scriptural or pastoral authority to teach us except for the Holy Spirit (and I know you didn't say this explicitly, but other have suggested it) is nuts. Of course we need learned guidance.

To say it's unchanged, I trust you already know that the gospel of Mark (largely agreed as the first gospel by a hundred years and written while some original witnesses were alive) was changed. It ended at 16:8. 16:9 through 20 INCLUDING DIRECT QUOTES BY CHRIST were added. They were added later to help assimilate the narratives of Matthew Luke and John. It was just made up.

Can you read Hebrew? Greek? Latin? You're trusting priests and ministers - and politicians - who were part of the King James council to interpret the Latin scripture to English. You're trusting others to interpret the Aramic to Greek or the Greek to Latin. I mean, I'm not saying the interpretation was wrong or uninspired- only that experts in languages did this and that it is still exegesis. It's still interpretation of what we consider to be truth and in some cases, an interpretation sparked by argument from a council and settled upon by James, a politician, himself.

Fortunately, imho, there are a number of unfaltering truths that have not been mismanaged over the years of scriptural history, however I am always open to interpretation, especially by learned experts with reasons "why" and "how" backed by scriptural language exegesis. Not so much by folks who claim to be led by the Holy Spirit. What the heck does that even mean? It's possible I guess, but I don't think the Holy Spirit speaks to one in one way and another in another. Especially as much as even the bible discussion page here suggests.

Take the verses of John 20:20-23 for instance. Many claim that Priests don't have the authority to remit sin. I read in 23 that Jesus specifically gave the authority to forgive sin to his apostles. We can argue that these verses mean that Christ was talking to His original apostles and that Christ didn't mean that this authority would extend to future apostles beyond them, but the Bible doesn't say that. You can call the Catholic a heretic for believing their Priest - their apostle to Christ - has the authority but you have no "scriptural truth" to back that with. This is just one example of probably many examples of how interpretations can, I guess, cloud the water. Basically I'm not sure if truth is so much relative as it is conditional.

kaylagrl · Apr 10, 2017

17Bees said:

Quote "I think everyone would agree with you, but I think it's because these are mostly platitudes. I mean, everyone - no matter their religion - would say their religion is true "

Right,that was the point. Truth is not relative. There is absolute truth. I think Id trust the man who died for me over Muhammad etc. When you take the Bible,archaeology and historical proof,we have a belief that is sure,more than any other belief system.The evidence is overwhelming compared to other religious beliefs.

Quote "To say we don't need anyone with any kind of scriptural or pastoral authority to teach us except for the Holy Spirit (and I know you didn't say this explicitly, but other have suggested it) is nuts. Of course we need learned guidance. "

My father is an evangelist,Im not against pastors. But we can read and understand the Bible for ourselves. A pastor leads a flock but they do not take the place of us reading the Bible for ourselves and having a personal relationship with God.

Quote "To say it's unchanged, I trust you already know that the gospel of Mark (largely agreed as the first gospel by a hundred years and written while some original witnesses were alive) was changed. It ended at 16:8. 16:9 through 20 INCLUDING DIRECT QUOTES BY CHRIST were added. They were added later to help assimilate the narratives of Matthew Luke and John. It was just made up. "

Please read the following....https://www.gotquestions.org/Mark-16-9-20.html

Quote "Can you read Hebrew? Greek? Latin? You're trusting priests and ministers - and politicians - who were part of the King James council to interpret the Latin scripture to English. You're trusting others to interpret the Aramic to Greek or the Greek to Latin. I mean, I'm not saying the interpretation was wrong or uninspired- only that experts in languages did this and that it is still exegesis. It's still interpretation of what we consider to be truth and in some cases, an interpretation sparked by argument from a council and settled upon by James, a politician, himself.

Please read....http://matthiasmedia.com/briefing/2011/04/have-we-got-the-right-bible/

Quote "Take the verses of John 20:20-23 for instance. Many claim that Priests don't have the authority to remit sin. I read in 23 that Jesus specifically gave the authority to forgive sin to his apostles. We can argue that these verses mean that Christ was talking to His original apostles and that Christ didn't mean that this authority would extend to future apostles beyond them, but the Bible doesn't say that. You can call the Catholic a heretic for believing their Priest - their apostle to Christ - has the authority but you have no "scriptural truth" to back that with. This is just one example of probably many examples of how interpretations can, I guess, cloud the water. Basically I'm not sure if truth is so much relative as it is conditional.

Please read...https://www.gotquestions.org/John-20-23.html

The Bible is clear,Jesus is our perfect,sinless high priest.The OT way of sacrifice is over and we can come to God through Jesus and confess our sin.

mailmandan · Apr 10, 2017

I was recently in a discussion with a Roman Catholic who claims that the Roman Catholic church does not teach salvation by works, then afterwards said this below:

We ARE saved by faith - as long as you properly define "Faith".
Faith is NOT simply "believing". Faith INCLUDES:
- Being baptized (Matt. 28:19-20, John 3:5, Rom. 2:29, Rom. 6:1-11, Col. 2:12-17, 1 Peter 3:21)
- Eating His body and drinking His blood/partaking the Lord's Supper during Mass (John 6:53-56)
- Picking up our cross daily to follow him (Matt. 16:24, Luke 9:23)
- Works of mercy and charity (Matt. 19:21, 25:31–46, Luke 18:22)
- Obeying his commandments (John 15:10)
- Doing the will of the Father (Matt. 7:21, James 1:22)
- We must suffer with Christ (Matt. 10:38, 16:24, Mark 8:34, John 12:24, Rom. 8:17, 2 Cor. 1:5-7, Eph. 3:13, Phil. 1:29, 2 Tim. 1:8, 1 Peter 2:19-21, 4:1-2)

His argument about faith being "defined as" and INCLUDES these works above is just sugar coated double talk and equates to salvation through faith (their version of faith) + works. Roman Catholics seem to think by not teaching that justification comes through perfect obedience to the law that they are not teaching salvation by works, yet they still claim that we are saved by accomplishing this check list of works above. What they are basically saying is that we are not saved by "those" works (works of the law), but we are saved by "these" works (good works). It's still salvation by works and good works fall under the MORAL aspect of the law (Matthew 22:37-40).

That Roman Catholic even challenged me to find an official Catholic document that says we can be saved by works "apart from the grace of Christ." So that must be the key for them. Works must be done "out of grace" in order to save us? His false gospel is the result of bad semantics and flawed hermeneutics. I once heard a man who attends the church of Christ make this statement: "It is works of obedience that help to save us, not works of the law or works of merit." More sugar coated double talk and Jesus does not need our help to save us. His finished work of redemption is sufficient and complete to save us. No supplements needed.

17Bees · Apr 10, 2017

kaylagrl said:

This is a little disappointing in that I or anyone could provide links to gotquestions-catholic and give rebuttals to each and every line item. It's that easy, but my point was that you stated that many Christians felt that truth was relative and didn't know THE truth. I argued that truth was probably conditional because people reach different conclusions from the same scriptures. I gave John 20 examples to show that two different conclusions can reasonably be reached but you are adamant in saying that you know THE truth while others who might reach a different conclusion are on the wrong path or heretical. And the kicker is that those people think YOU are on the wrong track and heretical. So we're all at a kind of impasse unless effort is made to really study with an open mind or constantly searching for the Mind of God. This is why I think that though I can read the bible by myself and understand it and so can you I'm sure, there is 2k years of study that's been going on and pastors or theologians can provide information I wouldn't necessarily think of that might shed light I wouldn't have seen.

kaylagrl · Apr 10, 2017

17Bees said:

I used the links because if I had answered in my own words you would have said I did not have enough knowledge to speak on the subject. Therefore I gave links that discussed the points you put forward.Its done all over this forum.

I did not disagree that pastors were helpful,but I said we can read the Bible and understand for ourselves also.I think the world of my pastor and he encourages us to read the Bible and study it for ourselves.

17Bees · Apr 10, 2017

mailmandan said:

Well, ultimately I think I'm saved by the mercy of God. That's pretty much the bottom line for me. God's Grace. He's allowed me to realize what He's done for me through the sacrifice of His only Son. And I believe that because I have faith. Therefore, I believe that faith manifests itself in works. The work of faith allows me to believe what God is telling me. And by believing that or by my faith in the Father, I understand His Grace. If I had no faith, His Grace would mean nothing to me. That understanding is a work of faith. Other works of faith include the things you mentioned. Not that works of faith save me - no - only God's Grace - but that by being saved and grafted into the tree of Israel, my faith manifests itself into works; doing the work of the Father, caring for the poor, obeying His commandments, etc.

Now, I'll be straight up. The Catholic church can try to over do this a little. They're constantly trying to remind their members that a good judge of our faith is the kind of fruit that's produced. And if there's little fruit produced, then faith is called into question. In a way, Protestants can refer to that "lack of faith" as backsliding and so they "rededicate' themselves to God or more or less get a little bit of a kickstart to their faith. This is the same intent of the catholic church as it sets guidelines of penance or whatever to remind us of where our faith should be. So our works are a kind of gauge of the level of faith. Still though, it has nothing to do with our initial salvation but rather more to do with our life as a person saved. That's kind of my feelings on the subject.

mailmandan · Apr 11, 2017

17Bees said:

Catholics and Protestants agree that bare, sterile, dead faith cannot save. Furthermore they agree that true faith is accompanied by good works. However they part company when it comes to the purpose of such works. For Evangelicals, good works are the necessary fruit and proof of genuine faith, for which Christ will reward them at His return. For Catholics, good works preserve and increase their personal righteousness for their final justification.

It's true that no sinner is saved by his own works. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us" (Titus 3:5). I often hear Roman Catholics protesting that the Catholic church does not teach salvation by works. However the official Roman Catholic teaching is that works are necessary to increase merit for the attainment of eternal life:

"If any one saith, that the justice [righteousness] received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema." (Council of Trent, Canons on Justification).

In the Catholic system, salvation begins at baptism by which God makes the sinner righteous. Throughout his life, God helps the believer to maintain and increase this righteousness by his good works. So, the good works done by the "disposition and co-operation" of man are not merely the "fruits" but also the "cause" of justification. Ultimately, a person is accounted to have satisfied the divine law by his works done by God's help, and thus he merits eternal life. He deserves and has the right to that reward. A Catholic author plainly admits, "It is a universally accepted dogma of the Catholic Church that man, in union with the grace of the Holy Spirit must merit heaven by his good works" (Dogmatic Theology for the Laity, 1977).

The Catholic system of merit is far removed from the Gospel of grace. If our works were, even partially, the basis for our salvation, then salvation is no longer by grace. Yet Catholics are encouraged to "merit the graces" needed to obtain eternal life by their works, without realizing that in so doing they are depriving themselves of the goodness and mercy of God. Romans 4:5 - But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works.

Official Roman Catholic teaching would not allow the sinner to rely by faith on the mercy of God or to believe that his sins are forgiven based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption alone. Something more is required. You must keep yourself saved by your own good works. You must merit grace and eternal life by your works. You must pay the debt of sins by your penance and your purgatorial sufferings. That is the Roman Catholic version of salvation by works.

Demi777 · Apr 11, 2017

All I gotta do is look at the 7 Sacraments and I know and see Catholicism is messed up...vs the bible

mailmandan · Apr 11, 2017

Demi777 said:

Amen to that Demi!

The Bible says in Romans 5:2 - ..we have access by faith into grace in which we stand.. yet while discussing this verse with a Roman Catholic, he had this to say:

"We have access by faith, the grace in which we stand, (in the Sacraments)." *Noticed how he "added" (in the Sacraments) to God's Word.

That same Roman Catholics also had this to say - "When we attend the Sacraments, we access the Sanctifying grace of God, by our faith. The gift of eternal life through the works of Christ in the Sacraments."

He also said, "we are saved by grace through faith in the Sacraments." The object of his faith in receiving salvation is obviously in the Sacraments and is not exclusively in Christ's finished work of redemption, which is sufficient and complete to save sinners. No supplements needed.

Demi777 · Apr 11, 2017

theres a good reason why luther only wanted to keep repentance, breaking the bread and baptism xD
The rest is pretty much junk.. well okay maybe we can say marriage is okay too..but their necromancy cult has nothing to do with the bible. Nor does their firming and chasity commandment have any solid biblical base.. Its absolute junk.

mailmandan said:

17Bees · Apr 11, 2017

mailmandan said:

Catholics and Protestants agree that bare, sterile, dead faith cannot save. Furthermore they agree that true faith is accompanied by good works. However they part company when it comes to the purpose of such works. For Evangelicals, good works are the necessary fruit and proof of genuine faith, for which Christ will reward them at His return. For Catholics, good works preserve and increase their personal righteousness for their final justification.

It's true that no sinner is saved by his own works. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us" (Titus 3:5). I often hear Roman Catholics protesting that the Catholic church does not teach salvation by works. However the official Roman Catholic teaching is that works are necessary to increase merit for the attainment of eternal life:

"If any one saith, that the justice [righteousness] received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema." (Council of Trent, Canons on Justification).

In the Catholic system, salvation begins at baptism by which God makes the sinner righteous. Throughout his life, God helps the believer to maintain and increase this righteousness by his good works. So, the good works done by the "disposition and co-operation" of man are not merely the "fruits" but also the "cause" of justification. Ultimately, a person is accounted to have satisfied the divine law by his works done by God's help, and thus he merits eternal life. He deserves and has the right to that reward. A Catholic author plainly admits, "It is a universally accepted dogma of the Catholic Church that man, in union with the grace of the Holy Spirit must merit heaven by his good works" (Dogmatic Theology for the Laity, 1977).

The Catholic system of merit is far removed from the Gospel of grace. If our works were, even partially, the basis for our salvation, then salvation is no longer by grace. Yet Catholics are encouraged to "merit the graces" needed to obtain eternal life by their works, without realizing that in so doing they are depriving themselves of the goodness and mercy of God. Romans 4:5 - But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works.

Official Roman Catholic teaching would not allow the sinner to rely by faith on the mercy of God or to believe that his sins are forgiven based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption alone. Something more is required. You must keep yourself saved by your own good works. You must merit grace and eternal life by your works. You must pay the debt of sins by your penance and your purgatorial sufferings. That is the Roman Catholic version of salvation by works.

Actually, I don't think you are that far apart at all. I agree with your statement when you said "...good works are the necessary fruit and proof of genuine faith, for which Christ will reward them at His return." What you are saying there is assigning value to works. You said you will be rewarded for works because they are the necessary proof of faith. You also said that sterile or dead faith cannot save, so faith without works is useless. I don't think this is far removed from the canon you quoted that assigns value to good works as well and that the value increases.

So, what are the necessary fruits? What is this proof of genuine faith? Catholics might spell that out with sacraments. For Protestants it might be a little more undefinable and probably argued to death or as noted by another poster, pick and choose which sacraments you like.

mailmandan · Apr 12, 2017

17Bees said:

There is value in works in regards to rewards (Matthew 16:27; 1 Corinthians 3:13-15) not in regards to meriting eternal life. Big difference! Yet Roman Catholics believe that salvation is received based on the merits of good works and Catholics also believe that James teaches we are saved by works, yet James is discussing the proof of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18), not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God (Romans 4:2-3).

In James 2:14, we read of one who says-claims he has faith but has no works (to back up his claim/where is the proof?). This is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" He is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith.

It's far removed because the value that Roman Catholics teach which increases is [righteousness] received which they teach is "preserved and also increased before God through good works." To the contrary, we read in Romans 4:5 - But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works.

Yet Catholics go beyond fruits merely being the proof of faith and teach that these fruits are also the means of their salvation. In regards to fruits as proof of genuine faith, In 1 John 2:3, we read - By this we know that we have come to know Him, (demonstrative evidence/fruits) if we keep His commandments. *BTY the Greek word for "keep" is "tereo" which means to keep, to guard, to watch over, preserve. It does not mean sinless, perfect obedience to all of His commandments 100% of the time as sinless perfectionists teach. Also, those who are born of God practice righteousness and not sin and love their brother (1 John 3:9-10; 4:7). Love being the first and foremost fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22).

For Protestants, it's not a matter of picking which sacraments you like and believe that save you, as it is with Catholics.

Catholicism

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

kaylagrl

Guest

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

kaylagrl

Guest

Senior Member

kaylagrl

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

kaylagrl

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member