k2aggie07 said:

---

"Some council" approved the scriptures after the protestant reformation and was held by Roman Catholics by themselves. It's rather strange to simultaneously appeal to and reject authority, isn't it?

Personal belief isn't a strong standard, which is exactly my point. For the record, conciliar confirmation of scriptures is superfluous and a relatively new idea in Christendom. The historical litmus test of scripture is what is read in Church, that is to say, it was established by use, not decree.

---

It was recognized by the Church. It wasn't established by the Church. The Bible was established by God himself. God's word is self attesting. It has nothing to do with me or anyone else.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Good thing I'm not protestant or Roman Catholic.

My view is "mono Christos" - I don't make an idol of the Church or the Bible, but worship Him alone.

---

RetiredAg said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

Aggi said:

---

By the same authority I can claim the Roman church isn't Christian. They are heterodox with regard to the teachings of the Godbreathed Scriptures.

---

Are you saying that Roman Catholics aren't "Christian"?

---

Absolutely. There may be Roman Catholics who are Christian dispite the Church. However, the Gospel of the Roman Catholic Church cannot save.

---

Do they not affirm the Nicene Creed?

---

They reject Sola Fide. To reject Sola Fide is to reject the Gospel.

The supremacy of Scripture is a confession in itself. A theological framework is used when approaching Scripture. These standards have been proposed and written down in confessions by Protestant synods and councils for the further edification of the Church. It would be beneficial to Protestants to read them and sit under the authority of them.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Weird, because the doctrine Sola Fide is found nowhere in the bible or in any Church writing prior to the 1500s. Guess all those chumps pre-Luther were doomed.

---

Simply false. It's in the Bible.

chuckd said:

---

The supremacy of Scripture is a confession in itself. A theological framework is used when approaching Scripture. These standards have been proposed and written down in confessions by Protestant synods and councils for the further edification of the Church. It would be beneficial to Protestants to read them and sit under the authority of them.

---

Those councils can and do err. The word of God doesn't err. God holds me accountable to His word, not the councils of men.

Should be easy to find chapter and verse then.

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

chuckd said:

---

The supremacy of Scripture is a confession in itself. A theological framework is used when approaching Scripture. These standards have been proposed and written down in confessions by Protestant synods and councils for the further edification of the Church. It would be beneficial to Protestants to read them and sit under the authority of them.

---

Those councils can and do err. The word of God doesn't err. God holds me accountable to His word, not the councils of men.

---

That is also a confession (Westminster):
31.4 All synods or councils, since the apostles' times, whether general or particular, may err; and many have erred. Therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith, or practice; but to be used as a help in both.

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

Aggi said:

---

By the same authority I can claim the Roman church isn't Christian. They are heterodox with regard to the teachings of the Godbreathed Scriptures.

---

Are you saying that Roman Catholics aren't "Christian"?

---

Absolutely. There may be Roman Catholics who are Christian dispite the Church. However, the Gospel of the Roman Catholic Church cannot save.

---

Do they not affirm the Nicene Creed?

---

They reject Sola Fide. To reject Sola Fide is to reject the Gospel.

---

I'm no expert on Catholic teaching, but from what I've read, it always seemed like works being directly tied to faith. Works aren't what save, but are the product of salvation. Without works, faith is dead. A tree that bears no fruit is dead.
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_fide#Catholic_view][/url]
Catholic View on Sola Fide

Quote:

---

Catholic exegetes believe that St. James had no other object than to emphasize the fact already emphasized by St. Paul that only such faith as is active in charity and good works (fides formata) possesses any power to justify man (cf. Galatians 5:6; 1 Corinthians 13:2), whilst faith devoid of charity and good works (fides informis) is a dead faith and in the eyes of God insufficient for justification (cf. James 2:17 sqq.)

---

Quote:

---

The Catholic position is best summed up in John 3:16, if one has the proper, contextual understanding of the word "believe". "Believe", in context and in ancient Judaism, meant more than an intellectual assent. "To believe" also meant to obey, which is seen, in context, in Jn 3:36, 1 Jn 2:3ff, and 1 Jn 5:1ff. Without our positive response to grace offered, salvation is not possible.

---

Quote:

---

"Faith, unless hope and charity be added to it, neither unites man perfectly with Christ nor makes him a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said that faith without works is dead (James 2:17-20) and of no profit, and in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision, but faith that worketh by charity (Galatians 5:6)."

---

It just seems that the argument is really a matter of the rejection that faith is a matter of "intellectual assent".

Again, I'm hardly a Catholic expert, and I find many of their positions to be wrong. But to say they aren't "Christian" is wrong, IMO.

k2aggie07 said:

---

The Word of God is Christ. I worship God, not a book. Only He is infallible.

---

Amen to this!

Quote:

---

I'm no expert on Catholic teaching, but from what I've read, it always seemed like works being directly tied to faith. Works aren't what save, but are the product of salvation.

---

This is not Roman Catholic teaching. They teach God's grace changes a man's nature such that he is justified because he is actually just. Analytic vs. synthetic justification.

Thaddeus73 said:

---

But Christ is the Head of His Church!

Ephesians 5:23

By rejecting the Church, you reject Christ, its head.

---

Thadd, I have bad news for you; the Protestants do this same exact thing.

Doesn't the book of James itself reject Sola Fide?

No no, only this faith vs that faith /Protestant

k2aggie07 said:

---

Should be easy to find chapter and verse then.

---

Quote:

---

Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.
Romans 4:4-5 NIV
https://bible.com/bible/111/rom.4.4-5.NIV

---

Quote:

---

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God not by works, so that no one can boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9 NIV
https://bible.com/bible/111/eph.2.8-9.NIV

---

Hmmm.. I don't see "faith alone" anywhere in there.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Hmmm.. I don't see "faith alone" anywhere in there.

---

Who is the ungodly man who does not work?

Thaddeus73 said:

---

St. James says that we are NOT saved by faith alone (James 2:24).

Luther says that we are.

Choose wisely...

---

You quoted the Bible incorrectly. James says we are not JUSTIFIED by faith alone. He doesn't say saved.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Hmmm.. I don't see "faith alone" anywhere in there.

---

I believe the concept of faith alone is addressed one time in the bible; and in that one instance it is cautioned that man is not saved by faith alone.

How many references to "faith alone is worthless" does someone need beside the near verbatim? Would it be stressing that demons themselves believe; would it be that stressing that not everyone who cries "lord, lord" will be saved. How do you get to sola fide from there?

Shhh you're spoiling the fun!

Besides their workaround is condensing the entirety of salvation into a binary event. They rob the beauty of deification and the great promises we have in Christ for actual and real salvation, change, rebirth in grace in exchange for an admittedly synthetic (false) grace that is not theirs as heirs but merely imputed to them. What a tragic paucity of belief!

Thaddeus73 said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Thaddeus73 said:

---

St. James says that we are NOT saved by faith alone (James 2:24).

Luther says that we are.

Choose wisely...

---

You quoted the Bible incorrectly. James says we are not JUSTIFIED by faith alone. He doesn't say saved.

---

Not sure how anyone can be saved if they aren't first justified....Or can you?

---

Justified has more than one meaning. The question is which definition is James using?

k2aggie07 said:

---

Shhh you're spoiling the fun!

Besides their workaround is condensing the entirety of salvation into a binary event. They rob the beauty of deification and the great promises we have in Christ for actual and real salvation, change, rebirth in grace in exchange for an admittedly synthetic (false) grace that is not theirs as heirs but merely imputed to them. What a tragic paucity of belief!

---

Clearly you are unfamiliar with Protestant teaching.

Quote:

---

in exchange for an admittedly synthetic (false) grace that is not theirs as heirs but merely imputed to them. What a tragic paucity of belief!

---

RetiredAg, this is the Roman Catholic view of justification. A man is not justified because of the imputed righteousness of Christ, but because the man actually becomes righteous in and of himself. Analytic justification. "A just man is justified."

In Ephesians 1 St Paul tells us that we have been "blessed in Christ with every spiritual blessing" so that we should "be holy and without blame before Him". Not merely counted Holy and without blame, but to be, to exist. We are "sons" and we have been "lavished upon" with "all wisdom and understanding" so that we know the "mystery of His will" to "gather together in one all things in Christ". We are "sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise" who is the "guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchase possession." He prays that receive "wisdom and revelation" and "the eyes of [our] heart being enlightened" why? To "know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us believing according to the working of the power of His might." We become part of the body of Christ and to be "the fullness of Him who fills all in all".

In chapter 3 he prays that we be able to comprehend the love of Christ through the indwelling of Christ in our hearts through faith, rooted and founded in love. The reason is that by comprehending the love of Christ with surpassing knowledge we are to "be filled with all the fullness of God". In chapter 4 he continues that we will attain "to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ". We "grow up in all things into Him who is the head - Christ".

St Paul prays for God to sanctify us completely in 1 Thess 5:23; he says in 2 Thess 2;14 that we were called to obtain the glory of Jesus, not merely to pretend that we have it. He says that we will be transformed to conform to Christ's glorious body (Phil 3:21).

St John says "when He is revealed, we shall be like Him." Not He will see us as Himself, but that we really will be like Him.

Which is why a distinction is made between justification and sanctification. "God in justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace"

The word imputes ain't in the bible. It seems to me to deny the real efficacy of the Holy Mysteries as means of grace in our lives - baptism, communion, etc.

Regardless, I'm not nearly as critical of confessional protestants, because generally they have these things worked out in at least a logically consistent framework. Whether I agree with them or not is another matter. But most modern evangelicals simply have no structure and believe a mishmash of chaotic gobbledygook which is neither logical, defensible, inspired, or has any authority.

k2aggie07 said:

---

The word imputes ain't in the bible. It seems to me to deny the real efficacy of the Holy Mysteries as means of grace in our lives - baptism, communion, etc.

Regardless, I'm not nearly as critical of confessional protestants, because generally they have these things worked out in at least a logically consistent framework. Whether I agree with them or not is another matter. But most modern evangelicals simply have no structure and believe a mishmash of chaotic gobbledygook which is neither logical, defensible, inspired, or has any authority.

---

1. There are a lot of theological terms not in the Bible.

2. It does not deny the efficacy of the sacraments.

"in sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace"

Q. 161. How do the sacraments become effectual means of salvation?

A. The sacraments become effectual means of salvation, not by any power in themselves, or any virtue derived from the piety or intention of him by whom they are administered, but only by the working of the Holy Ghost, and the blessing of Christ, by whom they are instituted.

3. I agree about having no confession, standard, consistent framework, etc. Denying church authority and tradition will only help Rome fulfill (albeit corruptly) a much needed human desire.

It's pretty disingenuous to come down theologically on Rome's soteriology based on a confession that is itself an admittedly supra- or extra-scriptural interpretation.

And it does deny the efficacy of the Mystery of Baptism, because we Orthodox believe that Baptism really and truly does communicate grace; not an imputed grace. Seeing as we believe that Baptism is the entry into the Church and the means of beginning a right relationship with God (God's sovereignty and economy notwithstanding), suggesting that justification begins with an imputed grace vice a real grace is an "issue".

I don't think anyone believes that the Holy Mysteries have an inherent grace based on anything other than Christ. This is readily apparent from the prayers said.