Posted on 12/30/2012 12:01:24 PM PST by narses
read Matthew 22:39 the second command is like it love your neighbor as yourself
also matthew 7:16 by your fruits you shall know them
yes, indeed you can love your neighbor in many many ways and Christ called us to do so
“You do not need to love your neighbor for salvation...In fact, you can not love your neighbor...”
Really? How odd. And yet we are commanded to do just that.
What denomination teaches such views?
{CRICKETS}
“yes, indeed you can love your neighbor in many many ways and Christ called us to do so”
Indeed He did. And yet there are those who Deny Him.
The only way a man can love his neighbor, or anyone else for that matter, the way God intends is if it’s the love of God working THROUGH him.
Love is the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23)
The fruit of the flesh is: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. (Galatians 5:19-21)
No one can do what God expects of him without the work of the Holy Spirit in him. We simply do not have it within ourselves, that corrupted sinful nature.
Friend, you are only showing your ignorance with such arrogant statements.
I was "born & bred" in the Protestant Evangelical tradition, and trained in Ivory Tower Evangelical schools (Moody, Wheaton). However, in God's timing I found myself conducting my doctoral studies in theology at a Jesuit-affiliated University, and discovered that much of what I had "learned" about the Catholic tradition was a caricature.
No, I haven't converted, but I have a healthy and growing appreciation for the Catholic Church. The above theological questions should lead to a mutually-respectful discussion among those who share belief in Christ as Lord and Savior. Snide put-downs only serve to remind me of the ignorance of my youth, when I mistakenly supposed that I "knew" that Catholicism was a false religion and the Pope was very likely the Antichrist.
It was an honor indeed to be called odd by that one.
Friend, you are only showing your ignorance with such arrogant statements.
I was "born & bred" in the Protestant Evangelical tradition, and trained in Ivory Tower Evangelical schools (Moody, Wheaton). However, in God's timing I found myself conducting my doctoral studies in theology at a Jesuit-affiliated University, and discovered that much of what I had "learned" about the Catholic tradition was a caricature.
Well good...Then maybe you can give a more educated view on what repent means and then apply it to the scriptures...
Odd only if one totally disregards the basic premise of the entire NT, and over a millenium of sacrifices on YHVH’s altar, where the blood was poured out on the mercy seat to atone for sin. Yeshua’s blood flowed out of his body, through a crack in the earth, and onto the mercy seat of the ark in the cavern below.
Only blood of an innocent can pay the price for sin. The acts of the sinner are just more self serving sinful acts; as filthy rags as the word says.
There are many deathbed conversions as well as re-versions to the Catholic Faith.
Where did you get the idea that there were no Catholic deathbed conversions? Just curious.
“Regarding the debate about faith and works: It’s like asking which blade in a pair of scissors is most important.”
~C.S. Lewis
But lay up to yourselves treasures in heaven: where neither the rust nor moth doth consume, and where thieves do not break through, nor steal.
Does CS Lewis have ‘infallibility?’
His analogy fails when one recognizes that without the saving faith (it also being a gift from God), there are no works; just self serving vanity.
Yes, treasures, but those treasures are only accruable to those with saving faith to get there.
James 2: 17-26 ...A stern warning from Saint James
17
So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18
Indeed someone might say, “You have faith and I have works.” Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works.
19
You believe that God is one. You do well. Even the demons believe that and tremble.
20
Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless?
21
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
22
You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by the works.
23
Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called “the friend of God.”
24
See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.
25
And in the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by a different route?
26
For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.
Religion Forum threads labeled “Ecumenical”
Ecumenical threads are closed to antagonism.
To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.
Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenical” thread may discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.
More leeway is granted to what is acceptable in the text of the article than to the reply posts. For example, the term “gross error” in an article will not prevent an ecumenical discussion, but a poster should not use that term in his reply because it is antagonistic. As another example, the article might be a passage from the Bible which would be antagonistic to Jews. The passage should be considered historical information and a legitimate subject for an ecumenical discussion. The reply posts however must not be antagonistic.
Contrasting of beliefs or even criticisms can be made without provoking hostilities. But when in doubt, only post what you are “for” and not what you are “against.” Or ask questions.
Ecumenical threads will be moderated on a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” basis. When hostility has broken out on an “ecumenical” thread, I’ll be looking for the source.
Therefore “anti” posters must not try to finesse the guidelines by asking loaded questions, using inflammatory taglines, gratuitous quote mining or trying to slip in an “anti” or “ex” article under the color of the “ecumenical” tag.
Antagonism posts:
#6, #36
[ Oh, Boy! Here we go. ]
Why would a real God even need a religion?..
But sheep need to “flock”... because they are sheep..
Sheep flocking and God dealing with them... OR NOT..
is the Elephant in the room..
Could be much entertainment in this thread..
I hope you are not implying that catholics are without faith and therefore have only empty works...I assure you this is not the truth. Faith allows the fruit borne of good works.
Satan rejoices when Christians bicker over semantics. ...makes it easier for the deceived who do not know Christ to point out their hypocrisies. To be Chrisiitan is to attempt to walk the path of Jesus in how we relate to our fellow man. “For what you do unto the least of my people you do unto me.” To those much is given much is expected.
No one that thinks salvation comes from a sun cookie will be at the wedding feast. I cannot suppose anything for everyone that gets called a catholic. Too broad of a brush
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.