Is there salvation outside the Catholic Church?

[Ezra]

Did you hear about the New Evangelization?
This is the catholic church supposedly trying to evangelize their own people because they did such a terrible job in the past....
And this isn't looking much better to me since people are leaving the church all the time.

it would help if the catholic would teach the Bible instead of the false junk

 

[farouk]

Interesting remark about catholics and protestants still seeing suffering in a religious context even today.

In the catholic church it's taught that we can offer our suffering for others...maybe those in purgatory, or maybe for others that are suffering in some way.

I don't think God wants His children to suffer.
I think of this more in the sense of Romans 8:28...
we can take anything and make it work for the good with God's help.

Great chapter of Romans there.

 

[farouk]

it would help if the catholic would teach the Bible instead of the false junk

We do need to focus on Scripture, indeed.

 

[epostle]

What false accusations did I make of the council of Nicea? I didn't even discuss it.
DID I SAY the council changed anything? It was the first council...how could it have changed anything?

Which assertions did I make?
I think I'll have to stop talking to you since you seem to have a problem with communication.

In post #789, you said:

As to Augustine,,,,I did say ECFs, of which he is not one.(which is false)
Some theologians will accept that the ECFs go up to about 400 or even 600...
MOST will stop at 325 because that's when the church began to CHANGE.​

325 was the year of the Council of Nicae. ECF before that are called ante-Nicene Fathers, but they are all called ECF. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Church to "change" the deposit of faith, or any doctrines that flow from that. You brought up this lie first, then you deny it and accuse me of not communicating. Doctrines develop, they cannot change. The canon of scripture is an example of development, and so is the full doctrine of the Trinity, (that is accepted by all) when it was clarified AFTER you claim the Church "changed".

Oh for goodness sake. Don't you know any church history?
Do you think the ECFs agreed with the following?
(quote truncated for the sake of brevity)

The idea of O.S. always existed in the early church.
But it was understood to be an effect of the fall.

Agreed.

AUGUSTINE changed this theology and stated that ALL HUMAN BEINGS are BORN IN SIN, including infants, as they bear the ACTUAL GUILT of Adam's sin.

So what? What's wrong with that? Where does Augustine contradict what was understood to be an effect of the Fall? In 200 year old liberal Protestant inventions?

AFTER Augustine, the church declared it imperative that babies be baptized ASAP,,

Nonsense.

BEFORE Augustine, they were baptized but for different reasons.

More nonsense.

“The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sins, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit.”​

Origen, Commentary on Romans, 5:9 (A.D. 244).
(in agreement with Augustine)

How could a knowledgeable catholic not know the above???

I know that Augustine wrote against the heresy of Pelagianism, which was condemned at the Council of Carthage in 418. So the ante-Nicene Fathers would have no knowledge of Augustine's refutations, because Pelagius wasn't born yet. But you demand I produce proof to the contrary which is stupid and unreasonable. This demonstrates the lack of historical context objectors have about Augustine, as well as ignorance of doctrinal development.

WHO mentioned ANYTHING about the identity of Christ?
You must be reading and daydreaming.

You're the one who brought up 325 as the year the Church started to allegedly "change". That was the year of the Council of Nicae that refuted Arius by affirming the identity of Christ. You brought up 325 first, I didn't.

AUGUSTINE IS NOT in agreement with the ECFs.
Perhaps YOU would like to paste some early church fathers that stated that
babies must be baptized BECAUSE THEY WOULD GO TO HELL IF NOT.

“And many, both men and women, who have been Christ’s disciples from childhood, remain pure and at the age of sixty or seventy years…” Justin Martyr, First Apology, 15:6 (A.D. 110-165).
(in agreement with Augustine)

“And when a child has been born to one of them, they give thanks to God [baptism]; and if moreover it happen to die in childhood, they give thanks to God the more, as for one who as passed through the world without sins.” Aristides, Apology, 15 (A.D. 140).
(in agreement with Augustine)

“Polycarp declared, ‘Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and Saviour?” Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, 9 (A.D. 156).

“For He came to save all through means of Himself–all, I say, who through Him are born again to God–infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2,22:4 (A.D. 180).
(in agreement with Augustine)

“I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord.” Polycrates, Fragment in Eusebius’ Church History, V:24:7 (A.D. 190).

“And they shall baptise the little children first. And if they can answer for themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let their parents answer or someone from their family.” Hippolytus of Rome, Apostolic Tradition, 21 (c. A.D. 215).
(in agreement with Augustine)

“[T]herefore children are also baptized.” Origen, Homily on Luke, XIV (A.D. 233).
(in agreement with Augustine)

“For this reason, moreover, the Church received from the apostles the tradition of baptizing infants too.” Origen, Homily on Romans, V:9 (A.D. 244).
(in agreement with Augustine)

“Baptism is given for the remission of sins; and according to the usage of the Church, Baptism is given even to infants. And indeed if there were nothing in infants which required a remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous.” Origen, Homily on Leviticus, 8:3 (post A.D. 244).
(in agreement with Augustine)

“But in respect of the case of the infants, which you say ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, and that the law of ancient circumcision should be regarded, so that you think one who is just born should not be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day…And therefore, dearest brother, this was our opinion in council, that by us no one ought to be hindered from baptism…we think is to be even more observed in respect of infants and newly-born persons…” Cyprian, To Fidus, Epistle 58(64):2, 6 (A.D. 251).
(in agreement with Augustine)

The keynote of the theology of Augustine is his concept of Christ as the Mediator, the God-man through whose humanity we come, in so far as created beings may do so, to the divine nature of Christ. Besides combating the Manichaean heresy, Augustine engaged in two great theological conflicts. The first was with the Donatists, a sect that held the sacraments invalid unless administered by ministers without sin, and the second was with the Pelagians, followers of a contemporary British monk who denied the doctrine of original sin. In the course of this conflict, which was long and bitter, Augustine developed his doctrines of original sin and divine grace, divine sovereignty, and predestination.​

AUGNET : 2337 Theology - introduction

 

[prism]

I could care less about Rome. And I am not asking you to cowtow to anything. Not asking you to agree with anything but your own beliefs. I am asking, as Christians, do we have to condemn each other? Is it enough to say, we do not agree? When I was overseas I fought side by side with men and women of different faiths. We fought for your right to believe what you want. Is that enough?

I guess you mean this type of thing?

Because you keep getting caught trying to pass off your moronic lies as the truth - and WE keep exposing you for it.

If you would just do your homework BEFORE you post - uou might have something interesting to add to the conversation . . .

 

[prism]

because He is a God.

Probably a typo (to 'put the best construction on a thing'), but really, speaking of Jesus Christ...He is God in the flesh. (not 'a God').

 

[prism]

Did you hear about the New Evangelization?
This is the catholic church supposedly trying to evangelize their own people because they did such a terrible job in the past....
And this isn't looking much better to me since people are leaving the church all the time.

No, I haven't heard. I think they need a house cleaning first.

 

[GodsGrace]

In post #789, you said:

As to Augustine,,,,I did say ECFs, of which he is not one.(which is false)
Some theologians will accept that the ECFs go up to about 400 or even 600...
MOST will stop at 325 because that's when the church began to CHANGE.​

325 was the year of the Council of Nicae. ECF before that are called ante-Nicene Fathers, but they are all called ECF. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Church to "change" the deposit of faith, or any doctrines that flow from that. You brought up this lie first, then you deny it and accuse me of not communicating. Doctrines develop, they cannot change. The canon of scripture is an example of development, and so is the full doctrine of the Trinity, (that is accepted by all) when it was clarified AFTER you claim the Church "changed".

Don't know why but your entire post will not print out.

You posted some stuff from the ECFs and then stated that the statement agreed with Augustine.

No wonder you have problems understanding YOUR faith...
You can't read correctly.

THOSE STATEMENTS DO NOT AGREE WITH AUGUSTINE.

Study up on some history...
it'll do you good.

 

[GodsGrace]

No, I haven't heard. I think they need a house cleaning first.

Looks like it's happening now with that law passed in NY.
Some parishes will go out of business.
Good.

 

[GodsGrace]

Probably a typo (to 'put the best construction on a thing'), but really, speaking of Jesus Christ...He is God in the flesh. (not 'a God').

I thought that too, but I know it's a typo from what GH posts.

 

[farouk]

Looks like it's happening now with that law passed in NY.
Some parishes will go out of business.
Good.

I'm not in favour of promoting the R. C. Church, but I'm not in favour of a secular moral void, either...

It's good to be identified as people of the Word of God.

 

[GodsGrace]

I'm not in favour of promoting the R. C. Church, but I'm not in favour of a secular moral void, either...

It's good to be identified as people of the Word of God.

The CC is not all bad.
It has held on to Christian morals and upholds them.
They have some wrong doctrine...as probably all churches have something or other wrong.


I do believe the CC is very misrepresented here ....
unfortunately. For the church, I mean.

 

[Taken]

No it's not...

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Act 2:38)

Or are you going to claim infants can repent?

Unlikely.

Dead babies do not repent.
Nor do Live babies receive the Quickening of their spirit by water baptism, without repentance.
Nor are dead babies Rejected for their inability to repent.

BOL teaches Catholic babies receive a Quickening of their spirit, without repentance and without their knowledge, because that is one of the many Corrupt things Catholics are Taught....along with AFTER their "supposedly" having been Quickened...they Continue to COMMIT SIN Against God.

Ya sure....Anyone with the Spirit of God IN THEM maintains their power (greater than God) to Stand against God whose Spirit is "supposedly" IN THEM <---- NOT!

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Grailhunter]

Probably a typo (to 'put the best construction on a thing'), but really, speaking of Jesus Christ...He is God in the flesh. (not 'a God').

lol, Number 1 am not a Mormon. I defend the right of those to believe in what they believe in...even you.
Two, the formula of the Trinity.
I believe the Trinity is real.
I believe that God the Father created the heavens and earth.
I believe that God the Father created Adam and Eve.
I believe that they can and do talk to each other.
I believe they can ask each other questions.
I believe that Christ said, the Father is greater than I.
I believe God can begot a Son. A real Son and a God.
I believe that Christ is the only begotten Son of God.
I believe that God the Father can give certain authority to the Son. All authority had been given to Him.
I believe that Christ will return.
I believe that Christ said that, He did not know the timing of the end, that God the Father does.
I believe that Christ will judge us at the end.
I believe that Christ in the garden He prayed to, talked to, His Father and asked for the Cup be removed from Him.
I believe that Christ in the garden said, But by your will not mine.
I believe that Christ was crucified, not God the Father.
I believe that it is Christ that was sacrificed to end all sacrifices.
i believe that salvation and the forgiveness of sins is through Christ.
I believe that on the cross Christ could not sense His Father and expressed His concern.
I believe that Christ rose from the dead and ascended to the Father.
I believe that Christ sits on throne on the right hand of God the Father.
I believe that the Holy Spirit was involved with the conception of Christ.
I believe that when asked by the mother of the sons of thunder, if they could sit on the thrones? He said that that was not His to give.
I believe that after His resurrection He appeared to Mary Magdalene and the Apostles.
I believe that Christ said, He had to leave for the Holy Spirit to come.
I believe in the ministry of the Holy Spirit.
I believe in the interactions between us and the Holy Spirit.
I believe that the Holy Spirit can communicate to those that believe.
I believe that the Shield of the Trinity is a good visual representation of the construct of the Trinity.
I believe that the exact specifics of the Trinity is beyond our comprehension.
God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.....
So, how you construct the details of the Trinity is up to you, I will neither argue with it or condemn it.

 

[Giuliano]

What is the brouhaha over Augustine about? The Catholic Church admits freely that their doctrine of original sin was not articulated so "precisely" until Augustine came along. In other words, there had been no clear Apostolic doctrine on the matter.

Catechism of the Catholic Church - The Fall

406 The Church's teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine's reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God's grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam's fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

The doctrine contradicts Ezekiel who says the son does not bear the iniquity of the father. We may be born with both good and evil urges; and perhaps we can say we inherited those from Adam, but there is no inherited sin.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

What we may be missing here is that God does not like seeing children affected by the sins of their parents. He doesn't like it. It isn't just. That is one reason Jesus came -- to correct that injustice. In this fallen world, some parents murder their own children. That's not right. It's not just, God doesn't like it. He also did not like seeing how death entered the world, with innocent children paying for the sins of their parents. Jesus came to bring justice. We have to believe in what he taught. If we really believe in him, we must believe what he taught. Do that, and we find it is possible to be righteous. God is Just to reward those who benefited from what Jesus taught and what he made possible.

Thinking that children should pay for the sins of their parents is a human way of thinking.

25 Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?

Aren't many sins wrong because we crave injustice and not love? We want others to suffer so we can get what we want. We want others to pay for our mistakes. That's the way people all too often act.

 

[GodsGrace]

@Giuliano
Gee, thanks for your post no. 835.

It's pretty amazing to me how some catholics come here, don't know their own religion and what its history is or what it teaches,,,and then they go on to ask ME to prove that I'm right when I state something THEY should know.

Augustine changed a few of the beliefs of the ECFs.
Babies being born with the GUILT of Adam's sin is just one of them.

Nice to have some that understand.
@Grailhunter is another person that knows his history.

 

[Giuliano]

@Giuliano
Gee, thanks for your post no. 835.

It's pretty amazing to me how some catholics come here, don't know their own religion and what its history is or what it teaches,,,and then they go on to ask ME to prove that I'm right when I state something THEY should know.

Augustine changed a few of the beliefs of the ECFs.
Babies being born with the GUILT of Adam's sin is just one of them.

Nice to have some that understand.
@Grailhunter is another person that knows his history.

I once had a Catholic cite the Second Council of Nicea as his way of justifying statues. Not that I care either way about images; but he had been talking about the "Ten Commandments" so I asked him about the statues. Back came the reference to the Second Council of Nicea. Funny that the Orthodox agreed with everything in that Council; but they don't permit statues. If you read what's actually written, you see it approved flat pictures/ images; and that remains a source of schism between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

If I were Pope and thought it would help repair the breach with Constantinople, I'd give up the statues. I like them and don't see them as sinful; but I don't need them that much. Go back to what was agreed to.

 

[GodsGrace]

I once had a Catholic cite the Second Council of Nicea as his way of justifying statues. Not that I care either way about images; but he had been talking about the "Ten Commandments" so I asked him about the statues. Back came the reference to the Second Council of Nicea. Funny that the Orthodox agreed with everything in that Council; but they don't permit statues. If you read what's actually written, you see it approved flat pictures/ images; and that remains a source of schism between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

If I were Pope and thought it would help repair the breach with Constantinople, I'd give up the statues. I like them and don't see them as sinful; but I don't need them that much. Go back to what was agreed to.

There aren't statues in most new churches these days.

In the Catholic Church down in town there's a back room with a row of statues of saints.
Under them there's this sign:
Before you begin to pray to a saint...
Have you considered praying to Jesus? (Italian of course)

I like that.

The breach...the Orthodox won't accept the Pope, and there's another easy disagreement that could be done away with (can't think of it right now) but they hold on to that one too.

It also makes no difference to me...as long as it's not the statue which isn't being worshipped -- which it isn't.

For those interested:

Second Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia

 

[BreadOfLife]

I nearly starved to death because those who were commissioned to send me the bread of life...did not. Nice try at twisting things.

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Mat 28:19-20)

But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
(Act 1:8)

Admit it, Rome does not evangelize except to bring others in subjection to their Church system.

If it weren't for the Catholic Church, your Protestant Fathers would not have known WHO Christ is.
The Catholic Church brought the Gospel of Christ to the WORLD under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-15}.

You CANNOT escape your origins . . .

 

[GodsGrace]

@Giuliano

The other was the filoque.
From the Nicene Creed.

This is the important one they do not agree on.
I have heard it said that they do not WANT to agree.
Don't know enough to say.

Here's the debate:

Filioque - Wikipedia