Posted on 10/19/2010 6:05:21 PM PDT by Gamecock
Then you need to correct your Catholic cohorts because that's what THEY tell us purgatory is all about; for the cleansing of sin which a person for some reason did not confess.
The doctrine has very little Scriptural support, even with the Scriptures that the Catholic church twists to support it. Most of the doctrine is based on councils which happened some 1500 years AFTER Christ;s death.
It's the perfect doctrine to fit in with Catholics works based salvation, but since salvation is not through works, it's in reality meaningless.
Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. Without faith it is impossible to please God. We cannot earn our way to heaven. If the Law which God Himself gave to Moses was not able to save anyone who kept it, then any law that man made up to replace it isn't going to either.
"I am curious to see the magisteriums interpretation of this portion of Romans."Would you care to cite the portion of the Gospels this portion of Romans is intended to reinforce? Stand alone it is subject to misinterpretation?
Would your care to cite the magisteriums interpretation of Rom 4 that was first requested?
If you were baptized Catholic, would you let that suffice if you came to Christ as an adult?
Of course. Do you think God doesn't know who are His family? Does Christ not know the names of His sheep? Must we be admitted to His covenant twice?
I was baptized as a baby into the Episcopal church. That baptism is completely "valid." Not because of the pastor who administered it but because of God who ordained it.
As a "Calvinist," I admire the systematic theology laid down by John Calvin in his understanding of God's word. And that theology includes the fact that re-baptisms are not necessary.
It leaves us in the same place as the adult who is baptized and thus trusts that God will keep him close to Him and not let him fall away. We trust that God will protect and love and guide the children He has given us.
"For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy." -- 1 Corinthians 7:14
That's pretty clear to me. Those children of believers, even one believer, are seen as "holy" in the eyes of God who placed them in that family in the first place.
Regarding obedience, like visually-augmented said, I don't think of the sacraments in terms of obedience. In fact, that's more in line with Rome's viewpoint and its harping on free will decisions.
Sacraments are gifts from God to His children to bring them closer to Him; signs and seals of the promises made by God to His own.
"The sacraments of both Testaments have the Author, the same promises, the same truth and the same fulfillment in Christ." -- John Calvin, "Antidote to the Council of Trent."
The parents don't believe for the infant. Baptism is simply a sign and seal of the covenant.
And I don't think Scripture says we are saved by "making a conscious decision to identify with Christ."
We are saved because God has numbered us among His family, and at a time of His choosing He will make that relationship known to every one in that family by the free gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
One thing strikes me - Presbyterians, Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists and Congregationalists are all generally more relaxed about baptism than the Baptists. God knows the heart. And I don't think any Baptist is in jeopardy of going to hell for not baptizing their infant, but I can't say the feeling is mutual from Baptists. Some have told me I risk my salvation by not being baptized publicly.
Which sounds more like the masons to me.
Nothing in that piece is scriptural...Where did your religion dig that stuff up???
In places like this...
Interesting note. Guess what today sits atop the same ground as the former ceremonial temple of Isis?
The Vatican.
"The Cult of the Virgin Mary:
Psychological Origins"
Amen, Harley.
Just like the Lord's Supper "represents" His sacrifice on our behalf, so does baptism "represent" a clean heart, albeit of an infant or adult.
They're both about what God has done for us; all past tense.
I see this cleansing of unconfess sins nonsense quite often but never from a Catholic. Typically, at least around here, a Catholic explains the doctrine correctly and the Protestant refuses to listen.
The doctrine has very little Scriptural support, even with the Scriptures that the Catholic church twists to support it
What did I "twist"? I read what is written and explained it how it is written.
Without faith it is impossible to please God. We cannot earn our way to heaven
That, too, is Catholic doctrine. We are not saved by good works alone, just as we are not saved by faith alone.
Provided the underlying sin htat had caused the impurity has been confessed or is a minor, venial sin.
Jesus is not enough
It's Jesus Who purifies, because of the sacrifice of the Cross. All we do is pray.
That Christ atoned the sins of others finds does not mean that we take on righteousness by imputation without actually having it. We already discussed this: if you want to build that analogy it leads to our righteousness being just as real and substantial and Christ’s death, which purchased it was real and substantial.
We are not saying the imputation of Christ's Righteousness is the only thing that occurs at the new birth.
The bible clearly says we are new creations in Christ. We have been given the Holy Spirit as a deposit and seal until the time of redemption. We are in Christ, children in the family of God, heirs of salvation. Nothing can separate us from the Love of God.
I don’t see what is so puzzling in Romans 4:3-24. First, the question there is not the nature of Abraham’s righteousness, but its source. St. Paul explains that it is not his circumcision that made him somehow righteous, but rather things that every Roman can do also: do works of faith. Compare Hebrews 11:8, James 2:21 where the scripture makes clear that not the works of the law save, but works of obedience and faith: Abraham had faith in God as he crossed the desert and father Isaac; he had faith when he obeyed God to the point of sacrificing his son.
Faith is NOT obedience/works.
Heb 11:11Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
Rom 3:20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.
Rom 4:4Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is COUNTED AS righteousness,
Rom 9:30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousnes did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works.
Romans 11:6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.
Gal 2: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.
Gal 3:10For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them."
Eph 2:9not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
2 Tim 1:9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,
Titus 2:14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
Titus 3:5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,
Again James 2 talks about THOSE who profess to have SAVING Faith, but have no works. Can THAT kind of faith save? No it is like a demons faith, worthless.
Paul mentions it also in Titus 1:16 "They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work."
That is not what I said, that is what you keep insisting. Baptism is a conscious decision to identify and be a disciple of Christ's and only comes after one is saved. For some reason, you keep insisting that we see baptism=saved, and no one is saying that. Once again, you atre baptized AFTER you are saved. When do you take communion? AFTER you are saved.
And neither of us believes baptism itself saves anyone. Both of us agree it is an act which illustrates the work God has done and is doing within us.
How's that? 8~)
lol, we travel parallel paths going the same direction
lol. I’m satisfied with that. Side by side. 8~)
No, because the interpretation of a single verse or chapter out of the context of the entire Revealed Word is specious. Throughout the Gospels and James Jesus spoke extensively of the need for both faith and works. Discussing a letter of Paul as a stand alone revelation and presuming that because it alone does not address the need for Works is an exercise fitting of a 16th century French Shyster who is concentrating on selected words, not the magisterium of the Catholic Church that has been entrusted with teaching entire the Word of God.
Baptism and partaking in the Lord's Supper are participated in AFTER being regenerated. They are not supposed to be done just because your parents are Christians.
Thank you for your great posts on this topic.
I suppose on rare occasions some adult tries to do it for whatever personal reasons, but the interview process that I described will determine if they were ever saved, and if the pastor and church have doubts, the candidate is not rejected so much, as urged to continue in studying, coming to church, etc. and applying at a later time.
also baptism is not mandatory to be a Baptist. Every church has different levels of believers.
I'll bet you thought that that lie falsehood would go unchallenged. Wrong again! There never was a temple of Isis or any other God at the site of the Vatican. NEVER!
The area was first developed as a private garden in uninhabited area outside on the opposite side of the Tiber from the city of Rome. The site was later converted to a circus in a project started by Caligula and that was later completed by Nero, hence the name “Circus of Nero”.
The Vatican obelisk was originally taken by Caligula from Heliopolis, Egypt to decorate his circus and is its last visible remnant. This area became the site of martyrdom of thousands of Christians after Nero blamed the Great Fire of Rome on Christians in 64AD. Because of that and becayse it was in this circus that Saint Peter was crucified upside-down it is holy ground.
I don't know what your motivation is to perpetuate falsehoods or what you think you have to gain but when the facts are as easily verifiable as these your efforts only make you look petty and dishonest.
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.