- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Actor Shia LeBeouf converts to Catholicism
Posted on 8/29/22 at 11:29 pm to Mr. Misanthrope
Posted on 8/29/22 at 11:29 pm to Mr. Misanthrope
quote:The reason why I hold out hope that some (many, even) Catholics are saved is due to a misunderstanding of the role of works in salvation that Rome teaches.
You’re certain that Roman Catholics are not members of the body of Christ? Are not good works to flow from a robust faith in Jesus’s finished work upon the cross? St. James tells us clearly faith absent works is dead. Can’t this be the works our Roman Catholic brothers are writing about? Not salvation by works but works done in service to Christ engendered by faith in Jesus’s blood? I very much hope this is the case.
Trust me, I don't hold my position lightly, and I don't believe Catholicism is a false church simply for minor disagreements. I believe that they teach a false gospel, which is why I believe that those who understand what Rome teaches and believe it whole-heartedly are actually outside of saving grace until the repent and put their trust in Christ alone.
I would like to believe that they merely teach that works flow from robust faith in Christ, but that's simply not true. They have a system of theology based upon individual merit that flows from the free will of man. Christ's sacrifice wipes away sin through baptism, but then it's up to man to keep himself justified by living a life of merit, and those sins that are still unpaid for at the believer's death must be cleansed through Purgatory. They teach that when we die, we don't go directly to Heaven to be with God, but that we must pay the penalty for our own sinful actions through years, centuries, millennia even, in Purgatory. That isn't the gospel of Jesus Christ, who paid it all on the cross, but it's a soteriology that teaches that Christ's death only made it possible for us to be justified, but we actually have to pay for our own sins and demerits first.
I agree with your statement that good works flow naturally from a Spirit-filled life of faith, and a "faith" (mere intellectual assent that James describes in chapter 2) that does not produce good works is certainly dead, but that has been touched on in this thread, and Catholics don't teach that works are a biproduct of faith, but that works are separate and work alongside of faith to justify a person before God.
Like I said, I don't take condemnation of Catholicism lightly. I pray that all Catholics will repent of their false gospel and put their trust--their entire trust--in Jesus Christ alone. The entire reason why I've engaged in this thread the way I have is because I know this board has lots of Catholics on it, and few people have challenged them beyond a few pokes at Mary or prayer to the saints. My hope is that the Lord will use my words to both help my Catholic friends see the error of their ways, as well as to help my Protestant brothers see that Rome isn't impenetrable.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 6:17 am to Mr. Misanthrope
quote:
Don’t misunderstand me, I’m not arguing a place of primacy for Peter as a proto-Pope.
But that’s what the RCC does.
If we read scripture, time and again, Jesus is referred to as the rock. He is also called the chief cornerstone. This is stated numerous times in both the Old and New Testament and any logical understanding of the scriptures makes one understand that it is Jesus who is the rock on which the church is built and who the gates of hell shall not prevail against.
Heck, in the same passage where Jesus calls Peter the little pebble, he also refers to him as Satan.
The Catholics do with this verse what they do with the verses about Mary. They take it way out of context and ignore numerous contradictory verses, simply to bolster a manmade tradition that they choose to postulate.
If you read through the New Testament, not one of the disciples ever writes about an instance where he has to report to Peter or even sought advice from him. If he indeed has a unique and special office appointed to him, don’t you think it would have been mentioned by someone?
As posted previously, not even Peter himself claims any special office or authority over the other disciples or their churches.
As for Mary, she’s not even mentioned after the book of Acts. If she was to be so highly venerated as the RCC does with her, shouldn’t she have been mentioned more?
This post was edited on 8/30/22 at 8:45 am
Posted on 8/30/22 at 4:31 pm to FooManChoo
Funny thing is, Foo - you both have the word "Presbyterian" in your names. That means that you are part of the same church, and most reasonable people would agree with that.
Posted on 8/30/22 at 4:37 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
My hope is that the Lord will use my words to both help my Catholic friends see the error of their ways, as well as to help my Protestant brothers see that Rome isn't impenetrable.
Rome is definitely impenetrable. You just don't know it yet. And as for your "Protestant brothers" many of them have fully embraced the Gay and Trans Agenda, including your own fellow Presbyterians. Your theological beef is in your own backyard.
Your own church, the Presbyterians, can't even agree on whether two men can get married, live an active gay sex life, and then go to Heaven. You are in schism with your larger denomination. It's like you've created your own church, just like Martin Luther and John Calvin!
I'm convinced that your "theology" is 90 percent attacking Catholics and their Faith, 5 percent claiming to have nothing to do with the main Presbyterian sect and 5 percent platitudes picked up from a Chick Comic book.
This post was edited on 8/30/22 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 8/31/22 at 7:46 am to Champagne
quote:The Mormons (Church of Latter Day Saints) also have the word “Church” in their name. It doesn’t follow that they are the same as us.
Funny thing is, Foo - you both have the word "Presbyterian" in your names. That means that you are part of the same church, and most reasonable people would agree with that.
Like I said before, “Presbyterian” only describes the form of church government, and a lot of beliefs can differ from denomination to denomination regardless of government.
Reformed Baptists and Independent Fundamentalist Baptists tend to be very different from one another in spite of having “Baptist” in their names. It isn’t about the name, per se, but the beliefs held.
To lump a conservative, orthodox denomination in with a liberal, heterodoxical denomination based only on the name of their respective denominations is both deceptive and lazy, especially as I have already explained that we are not the same.
This post was edited on 8/31/22 at 7:48 am
Posted on 8/31/22 at 9:27 am to Champagne
quote:After years of study and debate, I can assuredly say to you that I know that Rome is definitely penetrable, both from within and from without. From the lack of scriptural support for most of her distinctive positions and dogmas to the lack of uniformity of history and tradition, Rome's claims fall short on several fronts, and most of all, her very disposition that grants more glory to fallible humans than our infallible God further proves that she is starting from false premises, for all that we are to do as Christians should be to glorify God, not ourselves or other created beings.
Rome is definitely impenetrable. You just don't know it yet.
quote:I only call them "brothers" in the most general sense when they profess and confess faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone as a propitiation for their sins. Whatever false doctrines they support and promote, I do not support them simply for the sake of "brotherhood".
And as for your "Protestant brothers" many of them have fully embraced the Gay and Trans Agenda, including your own fellow Presbyterians.
With that said, the PCUSA is not in intimate brotherhood with my denomination precisely because they teach liberal theology that completely disregards the scriptures and compromises with the world.
quote:I think you misunderstand what a "denomination" is. The conservative Presbyterian denominations are wholly separated from the liberal ones (and each other) in constitution and authority. There is only a loose "association" between many of the conservative denominations that is more of an unbinding alliance that lends support than anything else.
Your theological beef is in your own backyard.[/i]I don't disagree, but I'm called to make a defense to anyone who asks me for a reason for the hope that is in me, and that means I have to defend the faith against Catholics, as well as other Protestants. This thread is about Catholicism, but I'm happy to use the scriptures to correct my Protestant brothers who have strayed from the word of God in another thread.
[quote]Your own church, the Presbyterians, can't even agree on whether two men can get married, live an active gay sex life, and then go to Heaven. You are in schism with your larger denomination.
My denomination and the RPCUS are not part of a larger denomination at all, and the PCUSA isn't "[my] own church". As an aside, if you're going to argue with Protestants, you should at least understand what they are.
quote:My denomination was formed as an American branch of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland, which was constituted on the heels of the Reformation. It wasn't a separate Church of Jesus Christ, but a separate expression of Christ's one Church. Neither Luther nor Calvin created a new Church, for there is but one Church of Jesus Christ just as He has but one body with many members.
It's like you've created your own church, just like Martin Luther and John Calvin!
quote:If you're convinced of this, you haven't been paying attention. My "theology" is Reformed (biblical). You can read the Westminster Confession of Faith if you want to know what my theology is, generally.
I'm convinced that your "theology" is 90 percent attacking Catholics and their Faith, 5 percent claiming to have nothing to do with the main Presbyterian sect and 5 percent platitudes picked up from a Chick Comic book.
Posted on 8/31/22 at 10:22 am to KiwiHead
quote:
There is nothing procedurally different. I will say this those that become attached to the Latin Mass very much prefer it.
It is controversial as currently the Pope and some of the Bishops are trying to kill the Latin Mass and communities which practice it.
There are differences maybe not procedurally(which I'm pondering your point there as the vernacular Mass is a valid Mass) but differences are there with orientation and prayers.
Orientation: The Consecration is a "sacrifice" to God in the Latin Mass facing the tabernacle(holy of holies) and cross; the common vernacular is a "celebration" facing the people.
About 2/3 of the Mass prayers were cut out when the Mass was transitioned from Latin to the vernacular. The biggest hits were the mentions of Jesus, and the Saints John the Baptist, Peter and Paul. Also most of the exorcism prayers were removed.
At the end of the day I believe it is an issue of efficacy of the Mass is greater when done in Latin. For example a prayer/ rosary before the Blessed Sacrament is more efficacious than praying while lying in bed as you fall asleep.
This post was edited on 8/31/22 at 10:25 am
Posted on 9/16/24 at 1:17 pm to Fat Bastard
quote:
sola fide is false
Paul disagrees with you. Id suggest reading his letters and not cherry picking verses from other books
Popular
Back to top


1




