Posted on 10/19/2010 6:05:21 PM PDT by Gamecock
Because we are saved by Christ's righteousness, freely and mercifully given to us by God, and not according to our own righteousness.
That is exactly the difference between the Scriptural understanding of justification and Rome's understanding. Rome says men become righteous on their own by following Christ's example. The Bible tells us that men are pronounced righteous by Christ's obedience and righteousness being tallied to their account through the generosity and goodness of God.
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin." -- Romans 4:4-8 "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
One has to conclude that all of the revealed Word is contained in Scripture and then exclude significant portions of Scripture, much of the Gospels to reach your conclusion. You guys make me laugh at the yoga-like contortions you have to go through to make all of the pieces of your wacky theology fit together like some kind of spiritual Rorschach test.
Rome doesn't. You didn't answer the question either, since God mosty certainly does all that Romans 4:4-8 does. The question, again, is that after sins are forgiven -- i.e. not any more imputed, -- does real change in the Catholic Christian occur. The answer is, yes it does. A saint is one whose soul is recongfugired to Christ, filled with a fruit of justice (Phil. 1:11), a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17), who is repulsed by sin and sins no more (1 Peter 1:10).
In this, like in most things, Protestant heretics read about one third of the Gospel available to them, and fail even at that.
In the coupon clipping world of Protestant evolution, one merely selects clippings and adds them together in random fashion. When somebody doesn't like the coupons or the order, the process is repeated. It is iterative; the current OPC, for instance is arguably is in the eighth generation for the descent of Protestantism.
1. Luther
2. Calvin
3. Knox
4. US Presbytery 1706
5. Old Side/New Side 1741
6. Presbyterian USA 1758
7. Old School/ New School 1837
8. Presbyterian USA 1869
9. Orthodox Presbyterian Church 1936<38> which led to a split in 1938 because the OPC was not Christian enough, and led to the formation of the Bible Presbyterian Church. If I am in error on any of this, please let me know so that I can correct my records...
Interesting. We have been very well instructed by the Reformed believers that the Gospels do not apply to Christians - only to the Jews - and that nothing that happened prior to the Resurrection matters. Except Isaiah and Jeremiah and select Psalms, that is...
"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go NOT into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Matt. 10:5,6.
"But he answered and said, I am NOT sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Matt. 15:24.
***************************************************************************
"Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent UNTO THE GENTILES, and that they will hear it." Acts 28:26-28.
*****************************************************************
These are NOT the same message. Any honest reading will tell you they are DIFFERENT. The question is: WHY? And when did it happen? What did Jesus Christ mean when He said He was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? And why does it take until the end of Acts for Israel to NOT be the recipient of the Good News, but the Gentiles instead?
I just wanna give you the biggest virtual hug in the world. You are very very close to getting it. Don't stop now. Hint: it's not about Jews versus Gentiles, well not precisely...
Back at cha! But I need just a little more input from you to understand where you’re going. Not about Jews v. Gentiles, well not precisely...??
I object to the use of the term "Reformed" because they reformed nothing. A more apt term would be Disruptors, or Revolters, or Renegades.
The message had to be delivered a little differently because the Greeks were not familiar with the OT and the overall history of Judaism and really had no need of it. Another piece of the puzzle is the number of Jews converted to Christianity. Hopefully this helps.
Point taken; however that is their term for themselves. If you notice, I capitalize and otherwise honour each of our antagonists' terms that they hold dear. Or try to remember to do so, in spite of myself. They call themselves Reformers; Reformers they shall be. However, their own declarations and publications will be judged on their own merits and treated accordingly...
It's actually Deformed. :)
I prefer “Protestant” as most broadly descriptive of the ecclesial groups that emerged following the Reformation. It is also accurate terminologically, since their distinctive is protest against the teaching of the Church.
The Baptist sometime proclaim themsleves not Protestant on the grounds that some heretical sects since 1c were proto-Baptist. I don’t think that anyone outside of that group believes the claim or thinks the Baptists are not among the Protestants; their theology for sure meshes right in with the rest.
“Reformed” in Protestant literature very often refers not to the entire mass of non-Catholic believers, but to some vaguely Calvinist subset.
“Reformation” is an established historical term, and it did result in a healthy reform done at the Council of Trent. Of course, the Protestant groups did not reform anything because they instead split, and continue splitting even among themselves.
Yeah, Marcionists.
I personally prefer "Paulywogs".
“”Paulywogs”. “
:)
Works for me.
Am I way off or way close?
Isn't that reform? They separate and reform like oil droplets in a vinegar dressing.
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.