Ping
bttt
THANKS
for the solid, Biblical and important cautions.
I think I’ll just sit back and watch the show.
Well, thanks GC!
I am sick and was in need of some good entertainment. This is going to translate into a great man flick. Action! Adventure! Ad Hominem! Straw man smacking!
Hold on, ye Catholics! Please don’t start until I have my popcorn!
I am hereby granting a special dispensation against Irving's Law being invoked here, on these two grounds...
1) that the author is specifically saying avoid Jack Chick apologetics, and
2) this is one of the rare times when I've ever heard a Protestant even mention Jack Chick...
Err...here's the thing Gamecock. We have believe it or not a moral assurance of salvation. IOW, we have all the peace that you guys claim to have because we know that God's mercy outweighs all our sins. I have every expectation that I will get to heaven if I persevere.
The sacraments are not at all *instead of* Christ's righteousness, they are empowered *by* and *through* Christ's righteousness.
I wonder....if this guy was out drowning in a lake, and Christ threw him a life preserver, would he refuse to take it? "Hey, because I'm not saved by a life preserver....that's just an inanimate object! I'm only saved by Christ! Not some piece of styrofoam!!!"
Meanwhile, Christ keeps telling himm..."Take hold of the life preserver". But he refuses. "No life preservers!!! No styrofoam!!!!" So he drowns.
Christ saves how He wills. It's not up to you or I decide how salvation works out. If Christ wanted to use bread and water and oil and wine to impart grace, then by gum, I'll take the bread and water and oil and wine and be darn thankful that He did so.
Endless cycles of sacramental forgiveness my foot!
Your thoughts?
Wish you Prots would occasionally point this out. It is important to you, isn't it?
Yep, considered pretty much all those things. More Catholic than ever.
***Do you really believe that the endless cycle of sacramental forgiveness to which you will now commit yourself can provide you the peace that the perfect righteousness of Christ can not?***
Jumping through hoops is for circus animals, not the saints of God.
Whomever wrote this-—
“Do you seriously believe the Apostles taught that Mary was immaculately conceived...”
has shown their absolute ignorance of the meaning of the Immaculate Conception and the Catholic faith.
I would like to hear what said sources are.
It's a bit funny, ain't it, that all the Apostolic Churches, including the Orthodox and Oriental Churches who dispute vigorously the Papal claims and have no truck with Rome, nevertheless seem to shy away from the Reformation doctrines like the plague.
Why is that, Dr. White? Were they *all* corrupted? Every single one of them? Did the Ethiopians all fall prey to the same "Romanism" that affected the Byzantines and the Malabarese and Armenians?
You can make a case that the Church Fathers are not as clear as we'd like. But to portray them as all over the map on core doctrines like the Eucharist is hogwash.
Someone of you Reformed Christians do me a personal favor and post one of the Fathers who is supposedly denying the Real Presence. Have at it. Their writings are all over the Internet...shouldn't be hard to find. I have seen enough of said quotations to know they are almost always twisted and wrenched out of context to support a Reformation position, and when you dig down deeper they are found to *assert* the very thing they are cited to disprove.
Enough idle chitchat. Let's roll up our sleeves and get to work here!
Yes. It's called free will. God extends mercy to all, and without compromising His sovereignty one iota, allows us to make a choice. Many choices. He allows within us the wheat to grow among weeds until the time of harvest.
Dr. White's theology, on the other hand, cannot cope with a falling away. If someone "comes to Christ" and then falls away and becomes a heathen....was he saved or wasn't he that first time? Did the justification take or didn't it? If it didn't take in the first place, which is the stock answer people usually give, then how does *anyone* know their "coming to Christ" was genuine and was not a sham?
This is not what the Fathers taught. The Fathers all taught that we are given a choice, and we are free to choose one way or choose the other. A man can come to Jesus in all sincerity, receive the gift of life, and, like the seed planted among the rocks, have his eternal life wither and decay and die.
If you come to the cross in all sincerity, you will not be turned away. Period. But woe to the man who loses heart, who ultimately draws away from the thing that gave him life, for it will be worse for that man than if had never known Christ at all.
I’m going to convert to Islam.
Key point being objective history. It really is interesting how the claims we hear all the time don't hold up.
This Top 10 list just not all that funny. But it was still funnier than anything Alex Murphy ever posted.
Serious question: why?
Some of Chick's stuff is just recycled, comic-book Alexander Hislop (etc.). Hislop's nonsense is an established part of at least the fundamentalist apologetic against Catholicism. (And the JW's, WWCOGs, etc., would embrace it as well.)
However, Chick has torched his credibility considerably with things like the Alberto Rivera affair, so maybe I can understand excluding him.
But Dave Hunt? Aside from the fact that Dave Hunt is not a Calvinist, what has he said that isn't an expansion on or explanation of stuff that the Reformers and their successors said?
Amazing that in this list the author does not ask the 2 MOST important questions:
1) Have you prayed to God, in the name of Jesus Christ, about which church you should join.
2) Have you received confirmation through the Holy Ghost that joining the Catholic Church is the correct decision.
If the person has prayed about his decision, and if his decision is confirmed by the Hold Ghost, then he should more forward with his baptism into the Catholic Church.
I’d be more worried about Islam if I were you, but keep on railing about papists, sport.