There are two kinds of religion. The religion that is of man and the religion that is of God.
Justified by Faith Means Justified by Christ
- Thread starter Robert Pate
- Start date
There are two kinds of religion. The religion that is of man and the religion that is of God.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Yes. And obviously, for most anybody engaged in theology. You just have a bone to pick with Catholic theology.
What on earth does that have to do with anything? It's logical failure to consider the source before you agree with a statement, unless you're implying that we ought to appeal to an earthly authority? In which case, I actually agree with you, which is what the early Church believed and practiced, just btw, in case you're unfamiliar with it. The early Church examined the person teaching them the Christian faith, to know if they should listen to him. If that person was the Bishop, then we listen. And if not, we ignore. It was so simple. And it's even simpler now that we have the 'Catechism of the Catholic Church.' We faithful actually now can know as much as the bishops have always. It's a remarkable period in Church history.
And I'm unfamiliar with 'initial justification,' 'ongoing justification,' and 'treadmill' wrt Catholic theology. Must be some of those silly 'vocabulary of the Protestant' words then.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
It is not Christian to judge others' souls.
The Apostles and even Christ Himself called people names.
You just don't like him. That's fine. It doesn't make him not a Christian.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Destroying an opposing theology, sure. There's one right theology, it's the theology of the Apostles, which is the theology of Christ Jesus, which is the theology of God. All the others are absolute stool. They should be destroyed. But it must be theologically, and not with force. And that is what we have here at TOL, or at least we have the potential for that.
One's bullying, is another's rebuking.
There's no necessary dilemma here, it can be both.
Who's in charge of hardening our hearts, according to Sacred Scripture, in your view?
You can winneth souls without being a doormat. And I think Saint John W does win souls, so what does that tell you.
John W's idea of winning souls to Christ is to beat them into submission with a baseball bat.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Maybe rhetorically, but not really. At times through history, there have been Christians who did apply even lethal force in order to 'spread the Gospel.' Saint John W is not them. And if you have eyes to see: he works so hard here, out of regard for those who are susceptible to being deceived. He knows that being deceived by charlatans, frauds, and other 'wolves,' is harmful. He wages war against wolf theology.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Some of the hard headed ones....like you, Robert, need a baseball bat. I doubt even that will make you listen.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Nope, 'Roman Papistry.'
wrt the doing of Catholicism, I'm sure that's true. Were you pre- or post-Vatican II? Must have been pre-, right? Or right around Vatican II, so you've witnessed the Tridentine Latin Mass in person, I'd imagine. I remember listening to William F. Buckley Jr. contrasting the Mass after Vatican II with the Tridentine Mass, and he said the Latin Mass to him was better. It made me think that the Latin Mass must have been like performance art, but very fine performance art. As I've come to learn more about the sacrifice, it makes a lot of sense to have a very inspiring performance surrounding it. Buckley made me think that in a sense, the Latin Mass, because it's the same Mass, the whole world round, that it is the pinnacle of the Mass on earth, and that in some ways, or maybe just one way, the Mass today, in the vernacular, is a step backward. But it's something like a living icon, the Mass, have you seen icons? They are lovely, to me, they depict a scene from the Bible, a character, and in ancient Greek abbreviation, the icon reads who is in the picture. The ancient sigma looks like a C, so the icons of our Lord have the letters IC XC, which abbreviates IECOUC XPICTOC by taking the first and last letter of the name. It could be that sigma only is C when it's the last letter, and is Σ otherwise, so His name then would be maybe IHΣOYC XPIΣTOC, but still, it's the first and last letters of the name, shows on the icon. The sacrifice is constantly celebrated except for one time of year, do you know which day it is? It's in the Easter season, it's not Easter itself, and I really don't think it's Good Friday, but other than that, I don't know which day, the sacrifice is not offered. Celebrating the Mass, celebrating the Eucharist, offering the sacrifice, this is what the Church is supposed to do. I know it sounds ritualistic, so be it, it's absolutely bulletproof that this is what the Church right from the start of things did, and there's no hint that it stopped or even slowed down at any point in history, until, the Reformation; now, all the sudden large swaths of Christians are not regularly participating in the ceremony where the sacrifice is offered. The sacrifice is why you go to Mass, you can't do that at home or in a study group, you have to be at the altar to sacrifice, and so you go to Mass. When the Protestants removed the altar from their worship service, people came to church for the singing and for the sermons. If they had needs, they'd come for the prayer. But "church" changed dramatically with the Reformation, and it's still actively changing through direct causal link of the Reformation. "Church" as Protestants think of it, looked very much like offering a sacrifice on the altar, with everything else about the "worship service" being centered around the sacrifice. The Reformation revealed that you don't have to faithfully attend the sacrifice, to be saved eternally. But if the Church is correct in insisting on continuing to offer the sacrifice every day, and at bare minimum each Sunday, in remembrance of the Lord's Resurrection, then this is what all our ancestors in the faith did that made them distinctly Christian, we all went to Mass. The bishops and clergy offer the sacrifice, being ordained, valid, authentic priests, and then the whole church has the opportunity to consume the offering, the body and blood of Christ our Lord.
The Mass is valid in Catholic and Orthodox parishes. It's what Jesus said to do. There's more than Mass to the Christian life, but there's never been less, not until after 1517, when the Reformation started. Find in Scripture where the Church doesn't celebrate the Eucharist? I'll wait. You can't, because the scriptures either don't mention the Lord's Supper, and so inconclusive, or they do, and that last one is the fact. I mean He literally says, "This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me." Acts 2:42 KJV confirms that the first Church began immediately.
:chuckle:
He has a rude, crude abusive spirit that is not of God, 1 John 4:1.
Jesus and the apostles never called professing Christians, devils.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
You're calling a professing Christian 'not a Christian,' isn't that just about the worst name you could call a professing Christian? You can reprimand him, by all means, but don't judge his or anybody's soul, unless they're like a murderer or a rapist.
All relationships are of a spiritual nature. To say that John W. is indwelt with the Holy Spirit is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. I suspect that he has not been born again by the word of God, which is the Gospel, 1 Peter 1:23. I am not saying this to be vindictive because he called me names. I am saying this hoping that he will come to Christ as a repentant sinner to be saved by him.
We are called to be discerners of the Spirit, "But he that is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is judged of no man" 1 Corinthians 2:15.
And then there is the possibility that John W. is a carnal Christian that has not matured yet. There were some of those in Paul's congregation, "For you are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying and strife and divisions, are you not carnal and walk as men?" 1 Corinthians 3:3.
I have known some of those that are carnal, but they eventually grow up and become mature Christians. How long has John W. been a Christian? I think that he is way over due. Regardless, I will continue to pray for him.
Right Divider
Body part
Your CCC is NOT the "authorized" doctrines of the body of Christ. That is the BIBLE that your "church" does not understand.
They, like all false religions have writings other than the Bible. This is the first indication that a religion is false. They either add to the Bible or they take away from the Bible. The Mormon's have re-written the whole bible. The Bible is the final authority, not a church or a religion.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
St. John W professes faith in the Gospel. I think you want to be generous and charitable. Pagans wouldn't dishonestly profess Christian faith.
John the apostle says, "Try the spirits to see if they be of God" 1 John 4:1. John W. does not have the Holy Spirit.
Thanks, Pate!!!! If you, one who, on record, argues that:
-Christ did not die for our sins, to pay for our sin debt, but, instead died to destroy the law, so that there is no sin debt,for which necessitates His death, and thus He died without a cause, in vain,
-The Old Testament, which includes the holy law of God, the Psalms, the writings of the prophets, testifying to the Lord Jesus Christ, no longer exists, is destroyed, abolished, made void, is not good, is not spiritual, and thus no one should cite it, in testifying to the Lord Jesus Christ, because it no longer exists,and the verses re. the law of God being preserved for ever, are in error, according to Pate-ianity, and we are all allowed to delete from the scriptures, add to it, change words, in the scripture,
-Murder, rape, theft, sodomy, adultery.........................are not sins/transgressions, and are OK by Pate-ianity,since "sin is the transgression of the law...for where no law is, there is no transgression....sin is not imputed when there is no law."
-Right/wrong, good/evil, are all subjective, since, according to Pate-ianity, "The Holy Spirit has replaced the law."
-All Christians are sinners, even though there is no law, according to Pate, to define the sin/transgression, and, again, Christ need not die for any future sins, as there is no law, according to Pate-ianity, to define the sin/transgression.
-Christians are not under the law, according to Pate, but, at the same time, are under the law, as Pate cites that the law was made for sinners, per 1 Timothy 1:9 KJV, and
Pate-ianity says all Christians are sinners.
-"Jesus" is righteous, because He kept the law 100%, not because He is God, and his walk in the law, is imputed to us, thus we become righteous by the law, and that is equivalent to the righteousness of God,
...would approve of me, I'd check my guns.
Pate is a child of the devil. My evidence? His testimony, which I have documented.
Last edited:
Caught, in another lie, as Pate, on record, deletes 2/3 of the scripture, and numerous NT passages, and adds words to the bible:
You, on record, argue that:
-Christ did not die for our sins, to pay for our sin debt, but, instead died to destroy the law, so that there is no sin debt,for which necessitates His death, and thus He died without a cause, in vain,
-The Old Testament, which includes the holy law of God, the Psalms, the writings of the prophets, testifying to the Lord Jesus Christ, no longer exists, is destroyed, abolished, made void, is not good, is not spiritual, and thus no one should cite it, in testifying to the Lord Jesus Christ, because it no longer exists,and the verses re. the law of God being preserved for ever, are in error, according to Pate-ianity, and we are all allowed to delete from the scriptures, add to it, change words, in the scripture,
-Murder, rape, theft, sodomy, adultery.........................are not sins/transgressions, and are OK by Pate-ianity,since "sin is the transgression of the law...for where no law is, there is no transgression....sin is not imputed when there is no law."
-Right/wrong, good/evil, are all subjective, since, according to Pate-ianity, "The Holy Spirit has replaced the law."
-All Christians are sinners, even though there is no law, according to Pate, to define the sin/transgression, and, again, Christ need not die for any future sins, as there is no law, according to Pate-ianity, to define the sin/transgression.
-Christians are not under the law, according to Pate, but, at the same time, are under the law, as Pate cites that the law was made for sinners, per 1 Timothy 1:9 KJV, and
Pate-ianity says all Christians are sinners.
-"Jesus" is righteous, because He kept the law 100%, not because He is God, and his walk in the law, is imputed to us, thus we become righteous by the law, and that is equivalent to the righteousness of God,
...would approve of me, I'd check my guns.
Pate is a child of the devil. My evidence? His testimony, which I have documented.