[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Who else are the ambassadors of Christ in the Earth?
[/quote]I am. Deal with it.[/quote]I do so very much hope so.
[/quote]
As a free thinker, as a man and as a Catholic.
You can forget trying to convert me to Calvinism. It’s too absurd for me.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
God must be the eternal Uncaused-causer, if he is not, then he lied. [/quote]
Or, “he” doesnt exist, so “he” didn’t say anything, and the people who made claims about what “he” said were either lying or on drugs… and the origin of creation is still filed under “we dont know”, not “…therefore, Yahweh.”[/quote]
Logic dictates otherwise. Way may not know how, but we do know that a necessary being must exist, for existence to be. Whether or not ancient Hebrews had any actual contact with ‘it’. I do not know, they may or may not have. But that doesn’t mean that ‘It’ ‘necessary being’ or what ever you call it doesn’t exist. But ‘I don’t know’ is not a final answer. Ask the hard questions and look for the answers. If you don’t know, find out. It’s not an end to say ‘I don’t know’. You learn as much from the journey as you do finding the answer. Because you may never find it, but you find out a lot by trying.
You can give up if you want to, I won’t though ever.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Damn it people, let’s argue points and not personal attacks. We were doing so good. Kiss and make up…
[/quote]
I’d tell him to kiss my butt…but he would!
[/quote]
Hell no, he’s mine! 
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
God must be the eternal Uncaused-causer, if he is not, then he lied. [/quote]
Or, “he” doesnt exist, so “he” didn’t say anything, and the people who made claims about what “he” said were either lying or on drugs… and the origin of creation is still filed under “we dont know”, not “…therefore, Yahweh.”[/quote]
Logic dictates otherwise. Way may not know how, but we do know that a necessary being must exist, for existence to be. Whether or not ancient Hebrews had any actual contact with ‘it’. I do not know, they may or may not have. But that doesn’t mean that ‘It’ ‘necessary being’ or what ever you call it doesn’t exist. But ‘I don’t know’ is not a final answer. Ask the hard questions and look for the answers. If you don’t know, find out. It’s not an end to say ‘I don’t know’. You learn as much from the journey as you do finding the answer. Because you may never find it, but you find out a lot by trying.
You can give up if you want to, I won’t though ever. [/quote]
Our disagreement isn’t that something caused our universe. Our disagreement is about the particular claims you (as a member of your group) make about that thing.
[quote]pat wrote:[quote]Tiribulus wrote:[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:Who else are the ambassadors of Christ in the Earth?[/quote]I am. Deal with it.[/quote]I do so very much hope so.[/quote]As a free thinker, as a man and as a Catholic. You can forget trying to convert me to Calvinism. It’s too absurd for me.[/quote]As a slave to righteousness (Romans 6), a man and a Christian I will never give up hoping and praying for you. It’s too absurd for everybody BTW, including me, apart from the very grace that it preaches.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< So, would you say that the Bible is the pillar and bulwark of truth?[/quote]Here we go again. I cannot possibly keep up with you (post wise). No, of course not. The church is. 1st Timothy 3:15 =] However there is no article, hence the ESV translation of A pillar etc. That doesn’t really matter though, either way the ekklesia, the assembly of the faithful (in other words the elect, in other words the invisible church) is indeed the “pillar and buttress” (ESV) of the truth. I would certainly hope so. Who else are the ambassadors of Christ in the Earth?
[/quote]How is someone supposed to find the true Church if it is invisible?[/quote]In short? Wherever there is a body making a pure enough profession of the biblical faith so as to convey true saving grace we have the visible church. In that body of professing believers there always has been and this side of the resurrection always will be both dead impostors and the truly elect and regenerate who are members of the invisible church or mystical body of Christ. Of the present dead impostors there surely are some who have not YET been truly regenerated, but who WILL. While yet on this earth one can be certain of the election of no other person than themselves. One can be no more certain of the NON election of another either. One can however be reasonably certain of the PRESENT state of many (1 John 3:10) by their belief and behavior.
We are commanded to call sinners sinners and beckon them to repentance. We are entirely forbidden from pronouncing their eventual final state because that is the prerogative of God alone. We can tell someone that if they die as they are they are going to hell. We cannot tell them that they are going to die as they are. I would welcome my own painful death before presuming knowledge of somebody’s else’s election or no and therefore simply treat everyone as if they are.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
<<< I hope you’re not postulating that “in person” I would understand much better you suggesting and blatantly saying that I am the whore of Babylon, anti-christ, pagan, and self worshiper (sorry if I forgot one). In normal discourse, depending on my mood, I would have gone either two routes…Pope Benedict XVI or good old S. Nick. I am sure you’d prefer I choose Benedict’s modus operandi over S. Nick’s. >>>[/quote]Actually I am and don’t hint at violence Chris. You wouldn’t feel this way if we were talking in person where we could see and hear each other. Besides, it’s unbecoming and in this case I’d turn the other cheek and offer you my hand even if you were beating me to death.[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Your sin does not separate you from Him? “Nay, your iniquities separate between you and God, and because of your sins has he turned away [his] face from you, so as not to have mercy [upon you].” (Isaiah lix. 2) >>>[/quote]Welcome the new and everlasting covenant Chris. You’ve never done anything horrendous huh? You really don’t understand sin my friend.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< So, would you say that the Bible is the pillar and bulwark of truth?[/quote]Here we go again. I cannot possibly keep up with you (post wise). No, of course not. The church is. 1st Timothy 3:15 =] However there is no article, hence the ESV translation of A pillar etc. That doesn’t really matter though, either way the ekklesia, the assembly of the faithful (in other words the elect, in other words the invisible church) is indeed the “pillar and buttress” (ESV) of the truth. I would certainly hope so. Who else are the ambassadors of Christ in the Earth?
[/quote]How is someone supposed to find the true Church if it is invisible?[/quote]In short? Wherever there is a body making a pure enough profession of the biblical faith so as to convey true saving grace we have the visible church. In that body of professing believers there always has been and this side of the resurrection always will be both dead impostors and the truly elect and regenerate who are members of the invisible church or mystical body of Christ. Of the present dead impostors there surely are some who have not YET been truly regenerated, but who WILL. While yet on this earth one can be certain of the election of no other person than themselves. One can be no more certain of the NON election of another either. One can however be reasonably certain of the PRESENT state of many (1 John 3:10) by their belief and behavior.
We are commanded to call sinners sinners and beckon them to repentance. We are entirely forbidden from pronouncing their eventual final state because that is the prerogative of God alone. We can tell someone that if they die as they are they are going to hell. We cannot tell them that they are going to die as they are. I would welcome my own painful death before presuming knowledge of somebody’s else’s election or no and therefore simply treat everyone as if they are.[/quote]
I’m writing a response, but until then I want to ask you two questions (one is more tame than the other), you said there will always be those of the invisible Church in that of the visible Church. So, you believe there is members of the invisible Church in visible Churches like Westboro Baptist (extreme, but well known).
And, if all these visible Churches hold members of the invisible Church, how come these members of the invisible Church in different Churches hold different doctrines than their fellow invisible Church members?
I have chest, delts and tri’s now, but no. There is no guarantee that a given specimen of the visible church holds any members of the mystical body Christ AKA the invisible church. It is all but certain however that even in the most faithful and pure of visible specimens that there be some who are both not YET converted and some who never will be and are hence the non elect. Again, there are people in my church who will go to hell. There may also be some of the truly elect attending horrendous specimens such as Westboro who will be called out to other local bodies or even be used to call an existing body to repentance and reformation. I have zero insight into where or when God may specifically move in that regard until He’s doing it.
EDIT:[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< And, if all these visible Churches hold members of the invisible Church, how come these members of the invisible Church in different Churches hold different doctrines than their fellow invisible Church members?[/quote]For the exact same reason that truly elect and converted individuals are not yet perfected, resurrected and glorified. PLENTY of division in your church as well Chris. You know that and responding with “yeah well we only have one authoritative version of everything” actually makes it worse as that erects a claim of divine exclusivity that punctuates the gravity of the division even further.
I was in church this morning for another meeting preparing for our outreach to the city of Detroit. This was our church this time and there were people there from dozens of other churches that do not claim to be the only true and faithful visible church. We consider our differences significant, but we recognize each other as fellow members of the mystical body who share a broken heart over that which breaks the heart of God. We therefore join hands, literally, and work and pray for a mighty triumphant move of the Lord in our city. We have an inter-congregational foot washing service coming up (that’ll be weird) to symbolize and strengthen our commitment to one another in Christ.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
God must be the eternal Uncaused-causer, if he is not, then he lied. [/quote]
Or, “he” doesnt exist, so “he” didn’t say anything, and the people who made claims about what “he” said were either lying or on drugs… and the origin of creation is still filed under “we dont know”, not “…therefore, Yahweh.”[/quote]
Logic dictates otherwise. Way may not know how, but we do know that a necessary being must exist, for existence to be. Whether or not ancient Hebrews had any actual contact with ‘it’. I do not know, they may or may not have. But that doesn’t mean that ‘It’ ‘necessary being’ or what ever you call it doesn’t exist. But ‘I don’t know’ is not a final answer. Ask the hard questions and look for the answers. If you don’t know, find out. It’s not an end to say ‘I don’t know’. You learn as much from the journey as you do finding the answer. Because you may never find it, but you find out a lot by trying.
You can give up if you want to, I won’t though ever. [/quote]
Our disagreement isn’t that something caused our universe. Our disagreement is about the particular claims you (as a member of your group) make about that thing.[/quote]
I haven’t really made any Catholic claims about any of that, except when you directly asked. I am not making my claims as a religious person. I am making them as a purely secular prospect.
That which works in religion must also be true outside of it or it is suspect. Like I said, truth is truth, whether in with in the scope of religion, or not. I am arguing outside of religion. Because if there is no God, then religion is less than worthless.
If you want to discuss Catholicism or Christianity in general I would be happy to oblige, but have at least pretend you believe that the uncaused-causer, the necessary being, is the same thing as what we call God. Otherwise it doesn’t make any sense.
Yes, I certainly do believe, beyond the shadow of a doubt that the creative force is God and that I can interact with him through faith. These are the claims I cannot deductively back up. I can make pretty good inferences, but not concrete arguments such as the cosmological argument.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:[quote]Tiribulus wrote:[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:Who else are the ambassadors of Christ in the Earth?[/quote]I am. Deal with it.[/quote]I do so very much hope so.[/quote]As a free thinker, as a man and as a Catholic. You can forget trying to convert me to Calvinism. It’s too absurd for me.[/quote]As a slave to righteousness (Romans 6), a man and a Christian I will never give up hoping and praying for you. It’s too absurd for everybody BTW, including me, apart from the very grace that it preaches.
[/quote]
If you are praying to change me, please do not bother. God put me where he wants me, I requested the grace of understanding my faith and he has provided. It doesn’t require me to use tortured logic or to shove square pegs in round holes either.
Secondly, what you believe has already condemned me and no amount of prayer will save me; which is the absurd part. I too pray for you, but not to change you. That you may be blessed with grace, peace, happiness, wisdom, and understanding.
The only thing that ever prevented us from having decent conversations is your insults and mockery of that which I hold dear. I will never tolerate that. If you mock me baselessly, I will strike back, and I will back it up.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< So, would you say that the Bible is the pillar and bulwark of truth?[/quote]Here we go again. I cannot possibly keep up with you (post wise). No, of course not. The church is. 1st Timothy 3:15 =] However there is no article, hence the ESV translation of A pillar etc. That doesn’t really matter though, either way the ekklesia, the assembly of the faithful (in other words the elect, in other words the invisible church) is indeed the “pillar and buttress” (ESV) of the truth. I would certainly hope so. Who else are the ambassadors of Christ in the Earth?
[/quote]How is someone supposed to find the true Church if it is invisible?[/quote]In short? Wherever there is a body making a pure enough profession of the biblical faith so as to convey true saving grace we have the visible church. In that body of professing believers there always has been and this side of the resurrection always will be both dead impostors and the truly elect and regenerate who are members of the invisible church or mystical body of Christ. Of the present dead impostors there surely are some who have not YET been truly regenerated, but who WILL. While yet on this earth one can be certain of the election of no other person than themselves. One can be no more certain of the NON election of another either. One can however be reasonably certain of the PRESENT state of many (1 John 3:10) by their belief and behavior.
We are commanded to call sinners sinners and beckon them to repentance. We are entirely forbidden from pronouncing their eventual final state because that is the prerogative of God alone. We can tell someone that if they die as they are they are going to hell. We cannot tell them that they are going to die as they are. I would welcome my own painful death before presuming knowledge of somebody’s else’s election or no and therefore simply treat everyone as if they are.[/quote]
You have made pronouncements of our final state, that’s been the whole problem with you all along.
The choice is ours whether or not to follow God, not his. He gives us all the opportunities and grace we desire, but the decision is OURS.
Sirach 15:15 - 20
“If you choose you can keep the commandments; it is loyalty to do his will.
There are set before you fire and water; to whichever you choose, stretch forth your hand.
Before man are life and death, whichever he chooses shall be given him.
Immense is the wisdom of the LORD; he is mighty in power, and all-seeing.
The eyes of God see all he has made; he understands man’s every deed.
No man does he command to sin, to none does he give strength for lies.”
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< So, would you say that the Bible is the pillar and bulwark of truth?[/quote]Here we go again. I cannot possibly keep up with you (post wise). No, of course not. The church is. 1st Timothy 3:15 =] However there is no article, hence the ESV translation of A pillar etc. That doesn’t really matter though, either way the ekklesia, the assembly of the faithful (in other words the elect, in other words the invisible church) is indeed the “pillar and buttress” (ESV) of the truth. I would certainly hope so. Who else are the ambassadors of Christ in the Earth?
[/quote]How is someone supposed to find the true Church if it is invisible?[/quote]In short? Wherever there is a body making a pure enough profession of the biblical faith so as to convey true saving grace we have the visible church. In that body of professing believers there always has been and this side of the resurrection always will be both dead impostors and the truly elect and regenerate who are members of the invisible church or mystical body of Christ. Of the present dead impostors there surely are some who have not YET been truly regenerated, but who WILL. While yet on this earth one can be certain of the election of no other person than themselves. One can be no more certain of the NON election of another either. One can however be reasonably certain of the PRESENT state of many (1 John 3:10) by their belief and behavior.
We are commanded to call sinners sinners and beckon them to repentance. We are entirely forbidden from pronouncing their eventual final state because that is the prerogative of God alone. We can tell someone that if they die as they are they are going to hell. We cannot tell them that they are going to die as they are. I would welcome my own painful death before presuming knowledge of somebody’s else’s election or no and therefore simply treat everyone as if they are.[/quote]
I’m writing a response, but until then I want to ask you two questions (one is more tame than the other), you said there will always be those of the invisible Church in that of the visible Church. So, you believe there is members of the invisible Church in visible Churches like Westboro Baptist (extreme, but well known).
And, if all these visible Churches hold members of the invisible Church, how come these members of the invisible Church in different Churches hold different doctrines than their fellow invisible Church members?[/quote]
Christ did not start any kind of invisible church. There is no where in scripture or otherwise. He started one church, what has branched of was done by man. Save for Mormanism, no other christian sect even makes the claim of divine inspiration.
I understand what Martin Luther did, he was fighting the corruption of church doctrine by man. The church itself admits as much and apologies for sins of the past. He gave control of the church to man and we therefore have done everything in our power to tear it down, yet it stands strong.
The rest of the ‘reformists’ were in it for their own glory, not God’s.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I have chest, delts and tri’s now, but no. There is no guarantee that a given specimen of the visible church holds any members of the mystical body Christ AKA the invisible church. It is all but certain however that even in the most faithful and pure of visible specimens that there be some who are both not YET converted and some who never will be and are hence the non elect. Again, there are people in my church who will go to hell. There may also be some of the truly elect attending horrendous specimens such as Westboro who will be called out to other local bodies or even be used to call an existing body to repentance and reformation. I have zero insight into where or when God may specifically move in that regard until He’s doing it.
EDIT:[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< And, if all these visible Churches hold members of the invisible Church, how come these members of the invisible Church in different Churches hold different doctrines than their fellow invisible Church members?[/quote]For the exact same reason that truly elect and converted individuals are not yet perfected, resurrected and glorified. PLENTY of division in your church as well Chris. You know that and responding with “yeah well we only have one authoritative version of everything” actually makes it worse as that erects a claim of divine exclusivity that punctuates the gravity of the division even further.
I was in church this morning for another meeting preparing for our outreach to the city of Detroit. This was our church this time and there were people there from dozens of other churches that do not claim to be the only true and faithful visible church. We consider our differences significant, but we recognize each other as fellow members of the mystical body who share a broken heart over that which breaks the heart of God. We therefore join hands, literally, and work and pray for a mighty triumphant move of the Lord in our city. We have an inter-congregational foot washing service coming up (that’ll be weird) to symbolize and strengthen our commitment to one another in Christ. [/quote]
Yes, there are some divisions with in the church, but most of them are really quite small. For such an incredibly large group (1.16 billion) we are quite united for the most part. You can go anywhere in the world and find the same mass as I do locally. I have traveled a great deal in my youth and been to many masses in many different countries. Other than language, it’s the same.
http://www.zenit.org/article-28425?l=english
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I have chest, delts and tri’s now, but no. There is no guarantee that a given specimen of the visible church holds any members of the mystical body Christ AKA the invisible church. It is all but certain however that even in the most faithful and pure of visible specimens that there be some who are both not YET converted and some who never will be and are hence the non elect. Again, there are people in my church who will go to hell. There may also be some of the truly elect attending horrendous specimens such as Westboro who will be called out to other local bodies or even be used to call an existing body to repentance and reformation. I have zero insight into where or when God may specifically move in that regard until He’s doing it.
EDIT:[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< And, if all these visible Churches hold members of the invisible Church, how come these members of the invisible Church in different Churches hold different doctrines than their fellow invisible Church members?[/quote]For the exact same reason that truly elect and converted individuals are not yet perfected, resurrected and glorified. PLENTY of division in your church as well Chris. You know that and responding with “yeah well we only have one authoritative version of everything” actually makes it worse as that erects a claim of divine exclusivity that punctuates the gravity of the division even further.
[/quote]
The difference between the division in our Church (which I include you in because you are baptized a Catholic) and the rest of the division through Christianity is that we don’t pretend it is okay. It is not part of God’s will for these people to be divided. There is one faith, there is no essential and non-essential doctrines which we can say okay you believe this I believe this and we can be friends.
Doesn’t work like that with having the truth Faith. Either you believe it or you don’t. Saying that it’s okay if you don’t believe in infant baptism and one baptism for the forgiveness of sins, or it’s okay if you don’t believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist, or it’s okay if you don’t believe in the Magisterium…doesn’t fly. We can still be friends, and we can be even better friends for having partially the same salvific truth, but to say your faith is true and my faith is true when they do not complete match is up is incorrect. There is one truth. One faith.
[quote]
I was in church this morning for another meeting preparing for our outreach to the city of Detroit. This was our church this time and there were people there from dozens of other churches that do not claim to be the only true and faithful visible church. We consider our differences significant, but we recognize each other as fellow members of the mystical body who share a broken heart over that which breaks the heart of God. We therefore join hands, literally, and work and pray for a mighty triumphant move of the Lord in our city. We have an inter-congregational foot washing service coming up (that’ll be weird) to symbolize and strengthen our commitment to one another in Christ. [/quote]
Yes and we remember (or we participate) in that feast, as well as, Christ’s sacrifice from dawn til dusk all over the world.
[quote]pat wrote:<<< what you believe has already condemned me and no amount of prayer will save me >>>[/quote]An absolute and utter falsehood. [quote]pat wrote:
<<< You have made pronouncements of our final state, that’s been the whole problem with you all along. >>>[/quote]What am I supposed to do with you Pat? I have never ever once done any such thing and have repeatedly clarified what I have ACTUALLY been saying all along including just 2 posts ago.
Trib said last night:
[quote]While yet on this earth one can be certain of the election of no other person than themselves. One can be no more certain of the NON election of another either. One can however be reasonably certain of the PRESENT state of many (1 John 3:10) by their belief and behavior. We are commanded to call sinners sinners and beckon them to repentance. We are entirely forbidden from pronouncing their eventual final state because that is the prerogative of God alone. We can tell someone that if they die as they are they are going to hell. We cannot tell them that they are going to die as they are. I would welcome my own painful death before presuming knowledge of somebody’s else’s election or no and therefore simply treat everyone as if they are.[/quote]What is the formula for cracking through that nuke proof barrier you have built around that “free thinking” brain of yours? Honestly man. I made the analogy last week about how I could say that Canada was north of the U.S. and you would mock me for saying it was in Mexico. Chris didn’t understand. This is why I made that illustration.
Here, listen to what Catholics hold in the faith about works (I am assuming that you just read over my words because they are not well put together and assume I am suggesting Pelagianism, which I am not). This guy is the Spiritual Father of an African-America parish so you’ll surely like him on that note.
Excerpt from Msgr. Charles Pope:
[quote]We have discussed before that an important principle of the Christian moral vision is to understand that it is essentially received, not achieved. Holiness is a work of God. The human being acting out the power of his flesh alone cannot keep, and surely not fulfill, the Law. The experience of Godâ??s people in the Old Testament bears this out. True holiness (and not mere ethical rule keeping) is possible only by and through Godâ??s grace.
In this sense we must understand the moral vision given by Jesus as a description rather than a mere prescription. Notice what the text says here: I have come not to abolish but to fulfill [the Law]. It is Jesus who fulfills the Law. And we, who are more and more in him, and He in us do what He does. It is His work.
[/quote]
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:<<< what you believe has already condemned me and no amount of prayer will save me >>>[/quote]An absolute and utter falsehood. [quote]pat wrote:
<<< You have made pronouncements of our final state, that’s been the whole problem with you all along. >>>[/quote]What am I supposed to do with you Pat? I have never ever once done any such thing and have repeatedly clarified what I have ACTUALLY been saying all along including just 2 posts ago.
Trib said last night:
[quote]While yet on this earth one can be certain of the election of no other person than themselves. One can be no more certain of the NON election of another either. One can however be reasonably certain of the PRESENT state of many (1 John 3:10) by their belief and behavior. We are commanded to call sinners sinners and beckon them to repentance. We are entirely forbidden from pronouncing their eventual final state because that is the prerogative of God alone. We can tell someone that if they die as they are they are going to hell. We cannot tell them that they are going to die as they are. I would welcome my own painful death before presuming knowledge of somebody’s else’s election or no and therefore simply treat everyone as if they are.[/quote]What is the formula for cracking through that nuke proof barrier you have built around that “free thinking” brain of yours? Honestly man. I made the analogy last week about how I could say that Canada was north of the U.S. and you would mock me for saying it was in Mexico. Chris didn’t understand. This is why I made that illustration.
[/quote]
Do with me? You are to do nothing with me. Your simply being dishonest here. You pronounced multiple times that we (Chris and I, or all Catholics) are on a strait shot to hell. Unless we give up truth and follow Calvinism…Well, here’s a clue, I ain’t giving it up for you or anybody else. So according to you, guess where I am headed?
You’ve not made this declaration only once.
Secondly, I am clearly not part of this so called ‘elect’, because of my faith. You believe in predestination, therefore according to the 4th and 5th tenets of your faith I have no chance. So no amount of prayer will save me according to you.
Sound ridiculous? Absolutely, but that’s the crap you want me to believe, but if I am pre-damned or pre-saved, whats the point of doing anything. I have no culpability in this scenario.
What you cannot claim is that I can be saved if I do X,Y,or Z, because if you believe in predestination, must necessarily believe I have no choice in the matter. If you do claim that there is a choice you are denying predestination. There is no other way around it, you either are or are not predestined. In your world view, I am not part of the elect, I am part of a world wide abomination and harlot and there isn’t a damn thing I can do about it. But I like her.
Such is the fallacy of faith you have displayed here.
Further, I have not mocked you, I have countered only when you insulted my faith which is dearer to me that myself. At least when I make a point I back it up, I don’t merely call you a whore and beg you to walk away from it. You do that, i point out what’s wrong and why it’s wrong, period.
You aren’t going to insult me into following the Presbyterian way, it’s just not going to happen.
Further your “illustration” is stupid. It’s just another way of saying, that you’re right and we are wrong. I am not the fact denier here. You saying with that analogy that you are presenting a fact and we are denying it, just to spite you, completly ignoring that fact that you insult and mock us every chance you get.
Another Clue: We’re not the problem. You are. You’ve made civil discourse impossible with your bold and baseless proclamations. You have not listed one actual fact that is wrong with Catholicism, only false hoods that don’t actually exist.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Here, listen to what Catholics hold in the faith about works (I am assuming that you just read over my words because they are not well put together and assume I am suggesting Pelagianism, which I am not). This guy is the Spiritual Father of an African-America parish so you’ll surely like him on that note.
Excerpt from Msgr. Charles Pope:
[quote]We have discussed before that an important principle of the Christian moral vision is to understand that it is essentially received, not achieved. Holiness is a work of God. The human being acting out the power of his flesh alone cannot keep, and surely not fulfill, the Law. The experience of Godâ??s people in the Old Testament bears this out. True holiness (and not mere ethical rule keeping) is possible only by and through Godâ??s grace.
In this sense we must understand the moral vision given by Jesus as a description rather than a mere prescription. Notice what the text says here: I have come not to abolish but to fulfill [the Law]. It is Jesus who fulfills the Law. And we, who are more and more in him, and He in us do what He does. It is His work.
[/quote][/quote]
You been up all night? I have, but I got hooked into working…Still working actually. I am stupid tired, but I can still make rational arguments.
[quote]pat wrote:
You been up all night? I have, but I got hooked into working…Still working actually. I am stupid tired, but I can still make rational arguments.[/quote]
No, I just do the whole Opus Dei kind of morning, woke up at 5:15 and kneel facing the east, kiss the floor, and say “serviam” then do my morning offering and head to perpetual adoration and do my spiritual reading in front of the Holy Eucharist.