Are you a Baptist with a big B? Chuck certainly was.

[OZZY]

...a grasp of scriptural salvation.

1....2....3.....pray after me.

Now you've got your fire insurance...

Seems you have no fire insurance . Your works are as filthy rags and if you are trusting them for salvation which the Catholics do I am afraid you salvation shall be in vain.


          "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God Not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9).

          "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).

          "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." (Titus 3:5-7)

All the Scriptures you quoted are found in Catholic Bibles too.  :-*

They are also found in the Mormon and Jehovah Witnesses bibles. So I guess you believe they are doctrinally correct also? :-/

No, not at all. I didn't say they meant the RCC is doctrinally correct either. I have many disagreements with the RCC, but I do think they are Christian. Heretical Christian perhaps, but Christian. Unlike LDS and JW, which I classify as Christian-based cults.

If they are Heretics then they are not Christians.You can't be both.

 

[christundivided]

The part about Baptists existing before Luther or Calvin is baloney.

Not in the sense that Chuck qualified it.

Its often funny how "facts" are "sticky" things. Spurgeon was a contemporary of John Gill and John Gill was most assuredly a "Reformed Baptist". Spurgeon's Doctrine was also clearly..... "Reformed Doctrine".

In reality......

There has never been but one "Baptist". That was John the "Baptist". Throughout the history of the New Testament. No one and I mean no one was every called a "Baptist" but him. In fact, His name was divine. It was ascribed to him by GOD.

If you want to talk about a real "Baptist". Then please..... don't talk about Spurgeon, Gill or whomever. Talk about "John". He was the only one "

When you claim to be "Baptist"... you're doing nothing but taking away from His heritage. His gift. His calling.  I know you would love for people to think you're just like John The Baptist.... but

You're not. Sorry. That's just the facts. Move on and stop being so arrogant. Even John said....

Joh 3:30  He must increase, but I must decrease.

I wish you guys would get your head out of the sand and realize... When you promote the "Baptist" as the ONE and ONLY.... TRUE..... FAITH. You're not being like John. He wouldn't have wanted himself promoted. He would prefer if you talk of Christ.... and PLEASE..... Don't tell me that "Baptist" and "Christian" are synonyms.

 

[christundivided]

...a grasp of scriptural salvation.

1....2....3.....pray after me.

Now you've got your fire insurance...

Seems you have no fire insurance . Your works are as filthy rags and if you are trusting them for salvation which the Catholics do I am afraid you salvation shall be in vain.


          "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God Not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9).

          "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).

          "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." (Titus 3:5-7)

All the Scriptures you quoted are found in Catholic Bibles too.  :-*

They are also found in the Mormon and Jehovah Witnesses bibles. So I guess you believe they are doctrinally correct also? :-/

No, not at all. I didn't say they meant the RCC is doctrinally correct either. I have many disagreements with the RCC, but I do think they are Christian. Heretical Christian perhaps, but Christian. Unlike LDS and JW, which I classify as Christian-based cults.

If they are Heretics then they are not Christians.You can't be both.

I imagine you think there are no "heretics" that call themselves "Baptist"? Silly......

 

[OZZY]

...a grasp of scriptural salvation.

1....2....3.....pray after me.

Now you've got your fire insurance...

Seems you have no fire insurance . Your works are as filthy rags and if you are trusting them for salvation which the Catholics do I am afraid you salvation shall be in vain.


          "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God Not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9).

          "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).

          "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." (Titus 3:5-7)

All the Scriptures you quoted are found in Catholic Bibles too.  :-*

They are also found in the Mormon and Jehovah Witnesses bibles. So I guess you believe they are doctrinally correct also? :-/

No, not at all. I didn't say they meant the RCC is doctrinally correct either. I have many disagreements with the RCC, but I do think they are Christian. Heretical Christian perhaps, but Christian. Unlike LDS and JW, which I classify as Christian-based cults.

If they are Heretics then they are not Christians.You can't be both.

I imagine you think there are no "heretics" that call themselves "Baptist"? Silly......

Of corse there are, but the Baptist Doctrine is not Heretical which the Catholic doctrine is,,,,,,,,silly

 

[christundivided]

Of corse there are, but the Baptist Doctrine is not Heretical which the Catholic doctrine is,,,,,,,,silly

Some Baptist doctrine is Heretical. The "Baptist" Bride doctrine is another "Gospel". I've even meet "Baptist" that are Full Preterist. AGAIN.... Heretics.

As much as you like to believe being "Baptist" is the "Thing" to be in denominations..... I don't think you really know your denomination very well.

 

[Izdaari]

If they are Heretics then they are not Christians.You can't be both.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." -- Inigo Montoya

Inconceivable! High Quality

No, heretics are by definition Christians who are in error. That's what the word means. It doesn't mean non-Christians.

And yes, as christundivided observed, it is entirely possible to be both Baptist and a heretic. There were quite a few of them on the old FFF.

 

[standingtall]

There has never been a "Baptist" government.

Just name "1" and lets take a look at their principles.

LOL.  The Baptists (with a big B) tried that when they voted for Jimmy Carter in droves.  We all know how that turned out, don't we?

 

[rsc2a]

The RCC means that grace is *necessary* for salvation but positive human effort must be added (which, they say, is itself moved by grace)....

Sounds like Sola Gratia to me...

The Protestant, however, holds that sola gratia means that, not only is grace necessary, it is *sufficient* to save the sinner. Thus, while in RC theology, a person can be given saving grace and yet fail to be saved, in Protestant theology, a person who is given saving grace cannot fail to be saved.

Aren't you an Arminian? Don't you see a conflict with what you are saying and that position? In other words, can you not see that the Catholic position is much closer to Sola Gratia than the Pelagianism strict Arminianism?

(Hint: Google "Council of Orange".)

 

[Izdaari]

There has never been a "Baptist" government.

Just name "1" and lets take a look at their principles.

LOL.  The Baptists (with a big B) tried that when they voted for Jimmy Carter in droves.  We all know how that turned out, don't we?

Well enough that they reversed themselves 4 years later and voted in Reagan. Not a (big B) Baptist, but much better.

 

[Izdaari]

The Protestant, however, holds that sola gratia means that, not only is grace necessary, it is *sufficient* to save the sinner. Thus, while in RC theology, a person can be given saving grace and yet fail to be saved, in Protestant theology, a person who is given saving grace cannot fail to be saved.

Aren't you an Arminian? Don't you see a conflict with what you are saying and that position? In other words, can you not see that the Catholic position is much closer to Sola Gratia than the Pelagianism strict Arminianism?

(Hint: Google "Council of Orange".)

Btw, I am not Calvinist or Arminian, but Lutheran WRT soteriology.

 

[rsc2a]

Btw, I am not Calvinist or Arminian, but Lutheran WRT to soteriology.

I'm a determinist.

In regards to Calvinist, Lutheran, Thomist, Augustinian....no idea...in fact, I've seen TULIP principles written that would fit all of them and, other than semantics, are nearly synonymous in regards to soteriology.

 

[ALAYMAN]

[quote author=rsc2a]
Sounds like Sola Gratia to me...[/quote]

Then you aren't very informed about the Solas.  The same grace that justifies in the protestant scheme of salvation is the same grace that sanctifies, but the Roman Catholic understanding of works post salvation is anything but Sola Gratia.  Yes, they'll gladly proclaim that without God's grace nobody can be saved, but it is not God's grace alone that keeps a person saved.

Aren't you an Arminian?

No.

 

[rsc2a]

Aren't you an Arminian?

No.

You sure rail on deterministic soteriological viewpoints an awful lot.

 

[Aviator]

*whispers quietly*

Catholics are also Christians.

/whisper


They also believe in salvation by grace.

LOL !!! 

How utterly ridiculous!

 

[rsc2a]

*whispers quietly*

Catholics are also Christians.

/whisper


They also believe in salvation by grace.

LOL !!! 

How utterly ridiculous!

You really should read the Catholic catechism instead of Chick tracts if you want to know about Catholic theology...

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm

 

[ALAYMAN]

[quote author=rsc2a]So basically you have no idea about sacramental theology in regards to the Catholic church (and a whole host of others, I might add).

I'm not saying I agree with Catholics regarding the sacraments,[/quote]

Grace is conferred in the sacraments, and regeneration is imparted via baptism in the Roman Catholic scheme.  Such a flawed understanding of grace is the reason a Catholic thinks that they can commit mortal sins and lose their grace/salvation.  If you think that's a sound scheme of grace you don't understand the Bible, and how it refers to imputed grace.  Study out "infusion" vs "imputation".

but I don't think attacking cartoon version of their theology...

Was the reformers mischaracterizing Roman Catholicism when they comprised the 5 Solas in contra distinction to the RC church?

...Furthermore, to insist that Catholics aren't part of the Church ranks among the highest form of theological arrogance and does nothing to advance the Kingdom.

Any Catholic that is part of the "Church" (I take exception to the  universal church theory as espoused by  most) is so in spite of the Catholic Church's teachings regarding soteriology, not because of it.  Call that arrogance if you want, but I stand on the shoulders of giants, not only of Baptist faith, but countless reformed/protestant heritage.  Holding to truth is not arrogant, but rather contending for truth in an ecumenical hodgepodge of postmodern gobbledy-gook theology.

You sure rail on deterministic soteriological viewpoints an awful lot.

You sure resort to inaccurate ad hominem an awful lot.

 

[rsc2a]

but I don't think attacking cartoon version of their theology...

Was the reformers mischaracterizing Roman Catholicism when they comprised the 5 Solas in contra distinction to the RC church?

The Reformers were attacking abuses in the RCC, notably the selling of indulgences. In fact, it might benefit you to understand the Reformer's views of the sacraments...

What does Baptism give or profit?

It works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.

What is the benefit of such eating and drinking [of the Eucharist]?

That is shown us in these words: Given, and shed for you, for the remission of sins; namely, that in the Sacrament forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation are given us through these words. For where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation.

- The Small Catechism by Martin Luther

---

...Furthermore, to insist that Catholics aren't part of the Church ranks among the highest form of theological arrogance and does nothing to advance the Kingdom.

Any Catholic that is part of the "Church" (I take exception to the  universal church theory as espoused by  most) is so in spite of the Catholic Church's teachings regarding soteriology, not because of it.

Any Christian that is part of the Church is so solely based on the finished work of Jesus Christ, irregardless of their erroneous beliefs.

* Regarding the universal church, you've got a problem with a lot of Scripture then. 

---

Call that arrogance if you want, but I stand on the shoulders of giants, not only of Baptist faith, but countless reformed/protestant heritage.  Holding to truth is not arrogant, but rather contending for truth in an ecumenical hodgepodge of postmodern gobbledy-gook theology.

If only people knew how much of their theology is "Catholic".....

 

[Ransom]

LAMER said:

Then you aren't very informed about the Solas.  The same grace that justifies in the protestant scheme of salvation is the same grace that sanctifies, but the Roman Catholic understanding of works post salvation is anything but Sola Gratia.  Yes, they'll gladly proclaim that without God's grace nobody can be saved, but it is not God's grace alone that keeps a person saved.

rsc replied:

So basically you have no idea about sacramental theology in regards to the Catholic church (and a whole host of others, I might add).

I have my copy of the Catholic Catechism right here. Would you mind explaining what part of it LAMER has contradicted? Thanks.

 

[rsc2a]

LAMER said:

Then you aren't very informed about the Solas.  The same grace that justifies in the protestant scheme of salvation is the same grace that sanctifies, but the Roman Catholic understanding of works post salvation is anything but Sola Gratia.  Yes, they'll gladly proclaim that without God's grace nobody can be saved, but it is not God's grace alone that keeps a person saved.

rsc replied:

So basically you have no idea about sacramental theology in regards to the Catholic church (and a whole host of others, I might add).

I have my copy of the Catholic Catechism right here. Would you mind explaining what part of it LAMER has contradicted? Thanks.

2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God's wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.

2011 The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men. The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

 

[christundivided]

we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification,

The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

We never merit anything. NEVER. There is a difference between "merit" and attempting to walk "worth" of our calling.