Communion

Home Forums All Things Catholic Communion

This topic contains 19 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Andres Ortiz 8 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1700

    weather
    Member

    <img src=” title=”Confused” /> A Lutheran friend went to a graduation mass and was wondering why only the host was given and not the wine also(I didn’t have a good answer).I have seen this at other Catholic Churches also,our Church has always offered both.

    #8451

    LARobert
    Participant

    Jesus cannot be devided. He is entire in both the host and consecrated wine, having overcome death and transfigured, it is not possible to separate Him. If one recieves either from one species or both in holy communion one has recieved the entire Christ. As there is danger of spilling the Precious Blood when the chalice is passed or people receive from the chalice, it is not always offered at communion time. One is not, “Missing out” on anything if one does not receive from the chalice. For Protestants (many of) whom have denied the real presence from the 1500’s on, and see the bread and wine at their communion service as simply a symbol of His body and blood, and something separate from Christ it is an issue.

    #8452

    weather
    Member

    Ron wrote:By the way, transubstantiation wasn’t proclaimed until the year 1215 by Pope Innocent III – again a tradition of man, not the Word of God

    [color=blue:2oc0olco]Martin Luther created “Consubstantiation” about 1516 after breaking away from the Catholic religion,so does that mean it’s a Lutheran tradition? I really cant see nothing wrong in tradition.[/color:2oc0olco]

    “Consubstantiation” is a term commonly applied to the Lutheran concept of the communion supper, though some modern Lutheran theologians reject the use of this term because of its ambiguity. The expression, however, is generally associated with Luther. The idea is that in the communion, the body and blood of Christ, and the bread and wine, coexist in union with each other. “Luther illustrated it by the analogy of the iron put into the fire whereby both fire and iron are united in the red-hot iron and yet each continues unchanged”

    #8453

    LARobert
    Participant

    [quote:llvek3mh]Ron wrote:By the way, transubstantiation wasn’t proclaimed until the year 1215 by Pope Innocent III – again a tradition of man, not the Word of God [/quote:llvek3mh]

    Ron writes lots of things that he has been told by his anti-catholic sources, the problem with his sources is they isolate concepts and ideas out of context from history and in an attempt to mislead people.

    Many words not found in the Bible (such as the Trinity) where “coined” or defined by the Catholic Church after the time of the Apostles because of people who challanged or denied what the Church had always held to be true. When Monophosites and Arians began spreading their heretical teachings the Church met in Councils to discuss, debate and settle the issues. We know from the New Testament that this occured in Jerusalem where the Apostles met to discuss and debate the issue of admitting Pagans directly into the Church or if they should first convert to Judaism before entering the Church. At Jerusalem, the Apostles met, they argued their case, both with each other and with Peter and prayed for guidance from the Holy Ghost. When the time came for a decision, Peter stood up, and made the pronouncement as to what they Church (under the guidance of the Holy Ghost) would do regarding the issue.

    Just as in the Council of Jerusalem. sucsessive Councils of Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals have acted as counil to the successors of Peter and studied the issues, and after looking into what has always been held everywhere, arguing the facts, and much prayer come to conclusions which is presented by the council to the Pope, who can confirms the decision of the Council and settle the issue. When people started teaching in error about the nature and essence of the Blessed Sacrament, and issues developed where people strayed from the correct teaching, the issues needed to be defined, clarified and resolved. The fact is that until that time there was no major need for defining the issue, as all Christans believed the same thing as the Pope would now have to define because of the errors that had begun to be spread around that time. So it was not as Ron and his minions would have us believe that the pope invented or proposed something new, but rather that he and the Church stood up and defined what the Church had always believed. If a new term was coined to express what had always been taught and believed, (just as the term Trinity had been coined to express and define what was always believed by Christians prior to the Heretical teachings that where being addressed) this is no more a new teaching or invention as it is a clarification.

    Liturgically we see this happening in two places. In the Creed, which is professed at the Mass, and at the Last Gospel, (John 1) (after the Arian heresy and until around 1970) the custom was to genuflect at the words “Et homo factus est” and “Et Verbo caro factum est” (“and He was made man,” and, “and the Word was made flesh”) the origin of these practices was so the priest who was offering the Mass and the people show in an external way their belief in the hypostatic union, or that Jesus is True God and True Man. Protestants may say it was an invention of the Catholic Church, when in fact is was simply a way of expressing the truths that had been held from the beginning of the Church, and the new custom was introduced to counter an error that had occured.

    #8454

    Ron K
    Member

    LARoberts says:

    [quote:2l57587r]Ron writes lots of things that he has been told by his anti-catholic sources, the problem with his sources is they isolate concepts and ideas out of context from history and in an attempt to mislead people[/quote:2l57587r]

    That is what type of an answer one will find if they do not follow Scriptures – the written word of God, not men. It may seem anti-catholic to those that have never seeked the truth from God’s word, but as Jesus said “If you are in the Word, you’ll know the truth and the truth WILL set you free” (John 8:31,32)

    One only has to look at what I tried to show with my last post, (but somehow it got erased. Seems like only so much is allowed in this website, mostly catholic without caring for the truth.) where I went to John’s gospel – pointed out the problems of taking it literally- John 6 Jesus says that we would not die, would not hunger or thirst – yet we physically do all three of these, so was He talking literal or spiritual? He even tells us this in John 6:63- My words are spiritual, for the flesh means nothing. I also pointed out that in Matthew 15:11, 17 Jesus and the disciples were reprimanded for picking and eating the grain – Jesus said that nothing that
    one puts into the mouth defiles them but what comes from the heart does, which shows whatever enters the mouth has no bearing in any matters, but how one believes does. Yet Catholics and others such as Lutherans don’t understand that communion only points us to be reminded of the only important case- Jesus death and resurrection. Ephesians 2:8+9 also tells us that its by faith not works LEST ONE BOASTS and then Titus 3:5 also tells us that salvation isn’t a matter of the righteous things that we do – but Catholics continue to think they can gain Heaven by going to communion – Now tell me – who is misleading whom????

    #8455

    LARobert
    Participant

    [quote:152y9drx]That is what type of an answer one will find if they do not follow Scriptures – the written word of God, not men. It may seem anti-catholic to those that have never seeked the truth from God’s word, but as Jesus said “If you are in the Word, you’ll know the truth and the truth WILL set you free” (John 8:31,32) [/quote:152y9drx]

    Oh my gosh, what a suprise, someone comes into a Catholic forum, says about how only he knows the truth, and the unchanging truths taught by the evil Roman Catholic Church which plots to overthrow the world and make everyone bow down to idols is false, and then is upset when the authentic teachings of the Church, the same teachings as the Apostles received from Christ Jesus are upheld. Even when the errors in the arguments against the Church and fabrications against the Church are pointed out. Even when the Scriptures and the authentic interpretation that has sustained souls unto their salvation is reviewed, it is insufficient because a proof text taken out of context is sufficient to prove his personal interpretation (at least sufficient for himself) Then Catholics are painted as being boastful because they have not seen fit to change what has always been held from the time of the Apostles to fit into a private interpretaion which contradicts 75% of what other Sola Sciptura adherents have been told by their own private revelations. Now who here is boastful? Those who submit themselves to Christ and the authority He gave the Church, or someone who tells us that we should toss out what the Apostles preached and follow him?

    [quote:152y9drx] but Catholics continue to think they can gain Heaven by going to communion – Now tell me – who is misleading whom????[/quote:152y9drx]

    Ronald: once again you prove yourself to be deluded and prone to the misrepresentations of your taskmasters who have confused you with taking select “proof texts” from both the Bible and the Unchanged Teachings of Christ given us by Him to the Apostles and unchanged to this day by the Church. Jesus lays down many requirements for salvation. In one handful of verses He tells us one of them is Faith, which comes as a gift from God. We also read in the Scriptures that we are to be baptized, we read that we are to keep the commandments, we read we are to Love the Lord our God with our whole heart and our whole soul, and to love our neighbor as ourselves. We read that Faith without works is dead. As Catholics we know that our own works are useless if they are done in a sinful state, and are done with our own self interests, but when done in a state of grace and when elevated by the fact that we offer to God those things He has given us, in true worship and honor and in unity with His grace and will they are eleveated not because we have done them, but because He has elevated them by His grace. As Catholics we don’t simply use one proof text about the foundation of the Church, we know Jesus founded it, and is the chief cornerstone, we submit to that, but we also read in Scripture Peter being the Rock on which Christ will build His Church, and how the Apostles are the foundation of the Church. Protestandt tend to look at one or two proof texts and ignore the rest of the Scriptures which brings with it a warped theology. The Catholic Faith looks at the entire Bible which shows the entire plan of salvation and is not a single requirement, but the entire plan for God’s Grace. Rather than plucking a verse out of the Bible and bending it to fit our private interpretation that differs from the next person who comes along, we submit ourselves to Christ’s will and follow the Church He founded and promised to remain with.

    I know one day soon you will see the entire plan of salvation and the way that Christ’s Church, remaining faithful to the traditions He taught the Apostles will bring you home, rather than relying on the private interpretations of men who follow the rebellion of the 16th Century revolutionaries. As for me, I’d rather choose the entire Jesus, rather than the edited and forever in dispute version of Protestantism

    #8456

    Ron K
    Member

    LARoberts says (as typically he always does) :

    [quote:3alb3xgc]
    Quote:
    That is what type of an answer one will find if they do not follow Scriptures – the written word of God, not men. It may seem anti-catholic to those that have never seeked the truth from God’s word, but as Jesus said “If you are in the Word, you’ll know the truth and the truth WILL set you free” (John 8:31,32)

    Oh my gosh, what a suprise, someone comes into a Catholic forum, says about how only he knows the truth, and the unchanging truths taught by the evil Roman Catholic Church which plots to overthrow the world and make everyone bow down to idols is false, and then is upset when the authentic teachings of the Church, the same teachings as the Apostles received from Christ Jesus are upheld. [/quote:3alb3xgc]
    The problem is that your church does NOT follow those teachings or I wouldn’t be here!
    [quote:3alb3xgc]
    Even when the errors in the arguments against the Church and fabrications against the Church are pointed out. Even when the Scriptures and the authentic interpretation that has sustained souls unto their salvation is reviewed, it is insufficient because a proof text taken out of context is sufficient to prove his personal interpretation (at least sufficient for himself) Then Catholics are painted as being boastful because they have not seen fit to change what has always been held from the time of the Apostles to fit into a private interpretaion which contradicts 75% of what other Sola Sciptura adherents have been told by their own private revelations.[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    BUT none of this is truthful, as I can prove if you’d evenpay attention in the slightest of details!

    [quote:3alb3xgc] Now who here is boastful? Those who submit themselves to Christ and the authority He gave the Church, or someone who tells us that we should toss out what the Apostles preached and follow him? [/quote:3alb3xgc]
    Yes lets look close to see just who is the false teacher! I’m all for that!
    [quote:3alb3xgc]
    Quote:
    but Catholics continue to think they can gain Heaven by going to communion – Now tell me – who is misleading whom????

    Ronald: once again you prove yourself to be deluded and prone to the misrepresentations of your taskmasters who have confused you with taking select “proof texts” from both the Bible and the Unchanged Teachings of Christ given us by Him to the Apostles and unchanged to this day by the Church.[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    Good lets do exactly that!

    [quote:3alb3xgc] Jesus lays down many requirements for salvation. In one handful of verses He tells us one of them is Faith, which comes as a gift from God. [/quote:3alb3xgc]
    Yes indeed and this is by grace, not works just as Ephesians 2:8+9 tell us so that we can do good works, just as Ephesians 2:10 explains and Romans 3:19-28 and there is more verses that says just this- it is a gift (Romans 6:23)

    [quote:3alb3xgc]We also read in the Scriptures that we are to be baptized, we read that we are to keep the commandments, we read we are to Love the Lord our God with our whole heart and our whole soul, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    And all these things are a result of having FIRST that saving faith otherwise what we have is a wage (Romans 4:4-6) not a gift by grace (Romans 11:6 also shows this)

    [quote:3alb3xgc] We read that Faith without works is dead.[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    Yes it does tell us that in James which just proves that if you didn’t have that saving faith, but only boasted that you had the faith you’d be lying. The difference is obvious when a person trtusts in what Jesus did upon Calvery’s cross alone to get their souls cleaned or they think somehow that they can merit God’s grace through the righteous acts that they do. which Titus 3:5 says (and Romans 9:30-32 and 10:2-4 shows) can’t be done.

    [quote:3alb3xgc] As Catholics we know that our own works are useless if they are done in a sinful state, and are done with our own self interests, but when done in a state of grace and when elevated by the fact that we offer to God those things He has given us, in true worship and honor and in unity with His grace and will they are eleveated not because we have done them, but because He has elevated them by His grace.[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    Look at what you write here – You admit that we can’t do them but then you turn around and say you can by His grace – the double talk is so obvoius!

    [quote:3alb3xgc]As Catholics we don’t simply use one proof text about the foundation of the Church, we know Jesus founded it, and is the chief cornerstone, we submit to that, but we also read in Scripture Peter being the Rock on which Christ will build His Church, and how the Apostles are the foundation of the Church.[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    Yes lookat Matthew 16:18 – it doesn’t say upon Peter’s church or that Peter would build his church. Look at what it says: I (Jesus not Peter) would Build my Church (again Jesus’ church not Peter’s). This is right after Peter declarers that Jesus is the Messiah – upon that fact, that Jesus is the Messiah. Note that shortly af ter this Jesus tells Peter to “get behind me Satan” – when Peter showed that he wasn’t infallible for a fact, but still very much human.

    [quote:3alb3xgc] Protestandt tend to look at one or two proof texts and ignore the rest of the Scriptures which brings with it a warped theology. [/quote:3alb3xgc]

    [quote:3alb3xgc]The Catholic Faith looks at the entire Bible which shows the entire plan of salvation and is not a single requirement, but the entire plan for God’s Grace.[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    Oh really? I think I’ve proven just how backwards your claims above really are!

    [quote:3alb3xgc] Rather than plucking a verse out of the Bible and bending it to fit our private interpretation that differs from the next person who comes along, we submit ourselves to Christ’s will and follow the Church He founded and promised to remain with. [/quote:3alb3xgc]
    And as I said earlier- who is trying to deceive whom? I can back up my claims WITH HIS WORD, not by popular so-called quotes by everyone that you claimed said this or that as what you claim was their staements and Paul wrote to watch out for in Galatians 1:6-9. My proof is God’s written word itself!!!
    [quote:3alb3xgc]
    I know one day soon you will see the entire plan of salvation and the way that Christ’s Church, remaining faithful to the traditions He taught the Apostles will bring you home, rather than relying on the private interpretations of men who follow the rebellion of the 16th Century revolutionaries. As for me, I’d rather choose the entire Jesus, rather than the edited and forever in dispute version of Protestantism[/quote:3alb3xgc]
    And as I’ve told you many times before, I have God’s plan, now it is your turn to come to the truth and reject your false religion!!!!

    #8457

    LARobert
    Participant

    You continue to prove my point by your rants Ronald. God has given us the big plan, Ronald chooses what he wants and then twists it into submission, contorting it into his own private posession.

    #8458

    Ron K
    Member

    [quote:qcnbdmzb]You continue to prove my point by your rants Ronald[/quote:qcnbdmzb]

    My “rants” as you call them, are and have been proven by God’s Word, which brings up this point – Why do you waste time telling us “how misguided Ron is” but never can you back up your arguments by God’s word alone? (without twisting what IT says)

    #8459

    LARobert
    Participant

    It amazes me that Protestants, the very ones who claim to go by Scripture alone, continue to this day to use a non-biblical phrase (“faith alone”) to describe how one is justified. In fact, Scripture goes out of its way to avoid using “faith alone” in reference to justification. For example, St. Paul used the word “faith” and its derivatives over 200 times; and the words “alone” or “only” a few dozen times. Some of the appearances of “alone” or “only” occur right in the very contexts that address the subject of Justification (Romans 3:29; 4:12; 4:16; 4:23; Galatians 2:10; 3:2; 4:18; 5:13). Yet in not one instance did St. Paul feel compelled to combine the two words to specify how Justification was procured. What would have kept him from using such an all-telling, all-important, phrase, if, indeed, the concept of “faith alone” was on the forefront of his mind? A haunting question, indeed, for anyone of Ron’s burden to contemplate.

    The burden is compounded when we recognize that Scripture considers the phrase “faith alone” to have the utmost importance, since it uses it in one very crucial place – – the very place it decides that it is appropriate to nullify the concept that Justification is by faith alone — James 2:24. In fact, not only does Scripture nullify “faith alone” as justifying, it reinforces its nullity by prefacing it with the clause, “You see, a man is justified by works” prior to adding “and not by faith alone.”

    Now, the way Ron tries to dismiss the fact that Paul refrained from using “faith alone” is to say that when Paul condemns justification by works, we are to interpret this to mean that Paul believed in faith alone for Justification. This may seem plausible to him, but it is quite wrong. Condemning works does not automatically mean faith is alone. There are other things that could be added to faith that are not considered works, and thus faith would not be alone. In fact, Paul condemned only one kind of work. He called them works of DEBT (Romans 3:28-4:4). How do we know there is a distinction? Because in the previous chapter Paul says that those who do good works will receive eternal life (Romans 2:6-7) and that those who obey the Law will be justified (Romans 2:13).

    As for works of DEBT, Catholics also condemn the idea that man can put God in debt to save him by his own works. The very first canon of the Council of Trent states this quite plainly:

    If anyone shall say that man can be justified before God by his own works which are done either by his own natural powers, or through the teaching of the Law, and without divine grace through Christ Jesus: let him be anathema.

    If you ask Ron how he deals with Paul’s teaching in Romans 2:6-13 9 (that those who do good works will be justified and receive eternal life), he will answer something like this: “Oh, Paul didn’t really mean that one can receive justification and eternal life for good works. It only appears that way. Actually, Paul was setting up an impossible task for man in order to drive him to the next chapter where he teaches that only faith without works will justify.” But notice what he’s done. Without any indication from Paul that he is setting up an impossible task.

    Why does Ron do this? Because he must in order to make his theology work. Look at it this way: There are two solutions to the seeming contradiction between what Paul says in Romans 2:6-13 and what he says in Romans 3:23-4:4. Either you conclude that Paul is dealing with two different kinds of works (works of debt and works of grace), or you say he is dealing with only one kind of work (any work). The Catholic Church has chosen the former; Ron has chosen the latter.

    #8462

    Ron K
    Member

    Do you ever realize what you write:

    [quote:1arpw1jq]It amazes me that Protestants, the very ones who claim to go by Scripture alone, continue to this day to use a non-biblical phrase (“faith alone”) to describe how one is justified. In fact, Scripture goes out of its way to avoid using “faith alone” in reference to justification.[/quote:1arpw1jq]
    Just as things like the “trinity” were never put down, that does not mean that it isn’t a fact! The Trinity is a factual teaching as well as faith “alone.”

    [quote:1arpw1jq]For example, St. Paul used the word “faith” and its derivatives over 200 times; and the words “alone” or “only” a few dozen times. Some of the appearances of “alone” or “only” occur right in the very contexts that address the subject of Justification (Romans 3:29; 4:12; 4:16; 4:23; Galatians 2:10; 3:2; 4:18; 5:13). Yet in not one instance did St. Paul feel compelled to combine the two words to specify how Justification was procured. [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    Yes indeed, just look at the verses that you list in your attempt to give Biblical support – none of which hardly addresses the faith alone subject –
    did you ever look at them or as usual, do you just assume that whatever your church lists for verse support “must be right?” (Same thing happens in your whole religion and is a good reason to check Scriptures out for themselves)

    [quote:1arpw1jq]What would have kept him from using such an all-telling, all-important, phrase, if, indeed, the concept of “faith alone” was on the forefront of his mind? A haunting question, indeed, for anyone of Ron’s burden to contemplate. [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    Do you mean like these verses:
    [color=red:1arpw1jq]Romans 3:19-28 – 19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all[a] who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
    Romans 4:4-6 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works: [/color:1arpw1jq]
    Boasting Excluded 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.

    Galatians 2:16 – [color=red:1arpw1jq]16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified[/color:1arpw1jq].
    And this is only a sample of “Faith alone” dispite never usingthw actual words!
    [quote:1arpw1jq]The burden is compounded when we recognize that Scripture considers the phrase “faith alone” to have the utmost importance, since it uses it in one very crucial place – – the very place it decides that it is appropriate to nullify the concept that Justification is by faith alone — James 2:24. In fact, not only does Scripture nullify “faith alone” as justifying, it reinforces its nullity by prefacing it with the clause, “You see, a man is justified by works” prior to adding “and not by faith alone.” [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    What burden is that? ‘e already showed how Faith alone is supported in Scriptures with Ephesians 2:8+9 followed by 10 – saved by faith, not works [u:1arpw1jq][b:1arpw1jq]TO DO good works[/b:1arpw1jq][/u:1arpw1jq] not to get saved by the works.
    there is no burden of proof needed on my end for it says what it says and is obvious.
    [quote:1arpw1jq]Now, the way Ron tries to dismiss the fact that Paul refrained from using “faith alone” is to say that when Paul condemns justification by works, we are to interpret this to mean that Paul believed in faith alone for Justification. This may seem plausible to him, but it is quite wrong. [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    Your problem is that you just ignore the scriptures that are obvious such as Romans 11:6 either works or grace but you cannot say grace through works because they are totally opposite in meaning

    [quote:1arpw1jq]Condemning works does not automatically mean faith is alone. There are other things that could be added to faith that are not considered works, and thus faith would not be alone. In fact, Paul condemned only one kind of work. He called them works of DEBT (Romans 3:28-4:4). How do we know there is a distinction? Because in the previous chapter Paul says that those who do good works will receive eternal life (Romans 2:6-7) and that those who obey the Law will be justified (Romans 2:13). [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    how many works erases sin? NOTHING but the Blood of Jesus does that, so this can only mean actions speak louder than words – a believer will have the characteristics of doing good works as proof of there saving faith. Can you obey the law perfectly? No and as James 2:10+11 tells us “[color=red:1arpw1jq]10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all….you have become a transgressor of the law.”[/color:1arpw1jq]thus you need redemption of some sort – this was provided totally by Jesus- 1 Peter 1:18, 19 – [color=red:1arpw1jq]18 knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot[/color:1arpw1jq]

    [quote:1arpw1jq]As for works of DEBT, Catholics also condemn the idea that man can put God in debt to save him by his own works. The very first canon of the Council of Trent states this quite plainly:

    If anyone shall say that man can be justified before God by his own works which are done either by his own natural powers, or through the teaching of the Law, and without divine grace through Christ Jesus: let him be anathema. [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    Ah back to your church’s tendency to double talk – which means one cannot do good works unless God provides the grace to do them? Now what is it can we or can’t we? You have a strange way to say good works count – it certainly isn’t Biblical

    [quote:1arpw1jq]If you ask Ron how he deals with Paul’s teaching in Romans 2:6-13 9 (that those who do good works will be justified and receive eternal life), he will answer something like this: “Oh, Paul didn’t really mean that one can receive justification and eternal life for good works. It only appears that way. Actually, Paul was setting up an impossible task for man in order to drive him to the next chapter where he teaches that only faith without works will justify.” But notice what he’s done. Without any indication from Paul that he is setting up an impossible task. [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    No thank you, but I can say things for myself which leaves no impossibility for anything as you claim where as I’m still waiting for your attempts to explain just how Scriptures tell us it is by faith (alone) in what Christ did (alone), its a gift, not accomplished by works – that you deny!

    [quote:1arpw1jq]Why does Ron do this? Because he must in order to make his theology work. Look at it this way: There are two solutions to the seeming contradiction between what Paul says in Romans 2:6-13 and what he says in Romans 3:23-4:4. Either you conclude that Paul is dealing with two different kinds of works (works of debt and works of grace), or you say he is dealing with only one kind of work (any work). The Catholic Church has chosen the former; Ron has chosen the latter. [/quote:1arpw1jq]
    Just look at what Romans 11:6 says, and is proven by verses 9:30-32 and 10:2-4 – and you will see who is interpreting it correctly

    #8465

    LARobert
    Participant

    I expect that you are in great physical shape with all the jumping to conclusions you do. I’ve explained to you before, I’m not married to the unbiblical ideas of Sola Scriptura. While you choose to look the other way when confronted by the fact that Sola Scriptura was an invention of the 16th Century, and not held by anyone until the second major rupture of Christian unity at that time, I (having read the scriptures from cover to cover more than once, despite your assertions that I have not) and after much prayer don’t come to the same conclusions as you have.

    While I do think you come to your errors in all good faith, and you truly believe in the human invention of Protestantism, or at least a mixture of a couple of schools of Protestantism, I can see very little in your theology that is supported by the teachings of Scripture and the interpretation of it by the Early Church. I also see no point in supporting arguments from a fallacious Sola Scriptura point of view. Point in fact the Theology you are attempting to support only has any validity when you edit the scriptures and interpret them in a mindset that refuses to look at the original languages, vocabulary, grammer and tenses, and historical context. You have made it clear that none of that matters to you. I’m sorry you live in a world that can be so upset by a comprehensive study of the Scriptures and is limited to individual proof texts and an interpretation of the scriptures utterly divorced from it’s proper context.

    But I’ll still keep you in my prayers, and enlist the assistance of God’s best friends, the Angels and Saints in intercession for the enlightenment of your soul, and your swift return to His bosom.

    #8466

    Ron K
    Member

    You do prove yourself to be correct in two areas-

    1 When you say –
    [quote:2eg6r5to] I’ve explained to you before, I’m not married to the unbiblical ideas of Sola Scriptura…don’t come to the same conclusions as you have[/quote:2eg6r5to]
    you just prove again how accurate the Bible is because dispite all of my efforts you simply – (1 Corinthians 2:14) [color=red:2eg6r5to]But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; [u:2eg6r5to][b:2eg6r5to]nor can he know them[/b:2eg6r5to][/u:2eg6r5to], because they are spiritually discerned[/color:2eg6r5to].
    [b:2eg6r5to]AND[/b:2eg6r5to]
    2 the part where you simply tell us the truth when you say
    [quote:2eg6r5to]I’m sorry[/quote:2eg6r5to]
    you definitely are “sorry” in your explainations!

    #8469

    LARobert
    Participant

    No suprise here that Ronald ignores the objective truth, quotes way way out of context, and has a behavior that would make a three year old blush. Something is just so wrong with the picture of Christianity that you edit and present Ronald. Very very wrong. Throw another tantrum it will be the only thing I’ve seen you do consistantly since the first posting I’ve seen here.

    I’m glad I have our Lady, all the angels and Saints on the side of Christ to join me in praying for your eventual recovery from the errors and self assurance that the confusion of the Protestant sects is superior to the Church Jesus founded.

    #8470

    Ron K
    Member

    Thanks LARoberts

    You are back to your personal attacks + your garbage when you’d be much better trying to prove your view. (But then you have none that stand up to the truth of the Gospel)

    Keep trying, its a free gift that even you can have!

    #8471

    LARobert
    Participant

    No Ronnie, not personal attacks, nor “my garbage” just statements of facts. When you are confronted with your ill behavior you run and hide behind the canard that you are being attacked. When I posted as a suggestion to the other posters here books that show scriptural proof of the Catholic Church and stories of former Evangelicals who have found the historical Jesus and His Church leaving behind the errors of Sola Scriptura without reading the books called them evil, yet the non-history and “proofs” taken out of context written by discredited writers like Hislop and Bottiner which you take at face value because they attack the Church and conform to your angry theology.

    When others and myself stated that we as Catholics do not worship statues, nor do we worship Mary and the Saints you belittled both Catholics and the Saints. Throwing tantrums like a little school child or ignoring statements both scriptural and non-scriptural and then later telling us that nobody has answered your questions is your M.O. Changing the subject when you either don’t have an answer, or using sarcasim is your common ploy. Complaining that you are persecuted when you are called on your behavior, retreating into whining that everyone is being mean to you when you liberally fling insults at the Catholic Faith and Her teachings, history and apologetics as well as posters here is your typical behavior, which you call teaching. But when someone brings up your behavior, thinking yourself to be the only one saved here, you become unglued. That unstable behavior is what I am pointing out, it is not as your paranoia would have you believe an attack simply a statement regarding your overreactions to anyone who does not follow lock step with you. That, and my concern for your estrangement from Christ, Ronald just two of the reasons you remain in my prayers.

    #8472

    Ron K
    Member

    [quote:or9z8ixo]No Ronnie, not personal attacks, nor “my garbage” just statements of facts[/quote:or9z8ixo].
    Just reread the last few in particular, we were discussing faith alone to which you start saying claiming that I threw a tantrum? That I was jumping to cunclusions, And you say that you aren’t doing the attacks????
    [quote:or9z8ixo]
    When you are confronted with your ill behavior you run and hide behind the canard that you are being attacked.[/quote:or9z8ixo]
    This was simply because you can not just ignore the Biblical proof that I pointed out!

    [quote:or9z8ixo]When I posted as a suggestion to the other posters here books that show scriptural proof of the Catholic Church and stories of former Evangelicals who have found the historical Jesus and His Church leaving behind the errors of Sola Scriptura without reading the books called them evil, yet the non-history and “proofs” taken out of context written by discredited writers like Hislop and Bottiner which you take at face value because they attack the Church and conform to your angry theology. [/quote:or9z8ixo]
    1- did you read some of those so-called Scripture references? As I said some of them weren’t even on the subject at hand!
    2- Historical witnesses? only because they, accordingly speak what you say? Yet even if these were their statements they don’t match up with God’s word, so why should they be considered Proof? I could put the same type of “proof” claiming this one or that one said it my way as well, but you would not take them serious either, so lets stick with the only thing that matters – [u:or9z8ixo]What does God’s word say?[/u:or9z8ixo]
    3 Who are you talking about “Hislop and Bottiner” Are you getting me mixed up with the dinasour guy again? I never heard of them?

    [quote:or9z8ixo]When others and myself stated that we as Catholics do not worship statues, nor do we worship Mary and the Saints you belittled both Catholics and the Saints. [/quote:or9z8ixo]
    Why does my pointing out what the Bible says about that type of idolatry become “Belittleing” you? Somebody needs to clearify where you are wrong. Sorry that your feelings get hurt so easily!

    [quote:or9z8ixo]Throwing tantrums like a little school child or ignoring statements both scriptural and non-scriptural and then later telling us that nobody has answered your questions is your M.O.[/quote:or9z8ixo]
    1- how do you figure that I threw a tantrum? 2 – usually they haven’t been answered or I wouldn’t have said it. But since you bring up that point – now is your chance to tell me what other book comes close to the Bible
    in telling us God’s wishes?

    [quote:or9z8ixo] Changing the subject when you either don’t have an answer, or using sarcasim is your common ploy.[/quote:or9z8ixo]
    Oh, ppppllleeease LARoberts – show us where I do this claim of yours?

    [quote:or9z8ixo] Complaining that you are persecuted when you are called on your behavior, retreating into whining that everyone is being mean to you when you liberally fling insults at the Catholic Faith and Her teachings, history and apologetics as well as posters here is your typical behavior, which you call teaching. But when someone brings up your behavior, thinking yourself to be the only one saved here, you become unglued. That unstable behavior is what I am pointing out, it is not as your paranoia would have you believe an attack simply a statement regarding your overreactions to anyone who does not follow lock step with you. That, and my concern for your estrangement from Christ, Ronald just two of the reasons you remain in my prayers.[/quote:or9z8ixo]
    Perhaps you are on to much medication – as this is simply a silly post that tells me you aren’t very stable or whatever your problem is …… let me know when you are willing to resume our conversations.

    #8473

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    Ron, when you accuse us of believing one way and we TELL YOU that [b:166nksjf]we don’t practice those beliefs[/b:166nksjf], you continue to accuse us as if you are calling us liars.

    [b:166nksjf]We know our faith[/b:166nksjf], [b:166nksjf]we know what we believe[/b:166nksjf]. When you attempt to tell us what we believe, EVEN AFTER WE TELL YOU OTHERWISE, your message falls on deaf ears because you aren’t willing to listen to us.

    You constantly accuse us and the Church of doing things that we really don’t. There’s no willingness on your part to think that your accusations or conclusions could be incorrect. You take and take and take and there’s no give.

    You hate the Church for what [b:166nksjf]you [u:166nksjf]think[/u:166nksjf] it is[/b:166nksjf], not for what [b:166nksjf]it truly is[/b:166nksjf].

    Your only aim is to prove us wrong based on what you think is the truth, not actually trying to understand what we say and know about Catholic beliefs and the Church of Jesus Christ.

    Dialogue has 2 parts: listening and speaking. You’ve mastered speaking so well it has taken over your capacity to listen (and reason for that matter). [u:166nksjf]Please do not continue to post here if you are not willing to dialogue[/u:166nksjf].

    #8474

    Ron K
    Member

    Jon

    [quote:o1k67uke]Ron, when you accuse us of believing one way and we TELL YOU that we don’t practice those beliefs, you continue to accuse us as if you are calling us liars. [/quote:o1k67uke]
    I use Scripture to [u:o1k67uke][b:o1k67uke]show[/b:o1k67uke][/u:o1k67uke] precisely where you are being deceived, yet you ignore that! Why Jon?

    [quote:o1k67uke]We know our faith, we know what we believe. When you attempt to tell us what we believe, EVEN AFTER WE TELL YOU OTHERWISE, your message falls on deaf ears because you aren’t willing to listen to us. [/quote:o1k67uke]
    I’ve heard what you say and then I try to show where you are being mis-lead – so who has the deaf ears Jon?

    [quote:o1k67uke]You constantly accuse us and the Church of doing things that we really don’t. There’s no willingness on your part to think that your accusations or conclusions could be incorrect. You take and take and take and there’s no give. [/quote:o1k67uke]
    Well what about Purgatory? Praying to the dead? The Real presence? How do you justify your church’s claims Biblically? The reality is that you can’t, not what I say, its what Scriptures are so clear about!

    [quote:o1k67uke]You hate the Church for what you think it is, not for what it truly is. [/quote:o1k67uke]
    What I think, Jon? Give me a break, I’ve shown you the Biblical side yet when I do, you just disregard everything I said.

    [quote:o1k67uke]Your only aim is to prove us wrong based on what you think is the truth, not actually trying to understand what we say and know about Catholic beliefs and the Church of Jesus Christ. [/quote:o1k67uke]
    Facts are facts Jon. And these are Biblically correct.

    #8475

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    Thank you for proving my point. Ron, you are done here. Good bye.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.