tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post1678494972907225279..comments2024-03-15T09:07:15.798-07:00Comments on NICK'S CATHOLIC BLOG: The justification verses that Protestants missed.Nickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comBlogger201125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-91746817761511215122013-05-16T04:04:46.648-07:002013-05-16T04:04:46.648-07:00And what did that Church look like?
A gentleman n...And what did that Church look like?<br /><br />A gentleman named Mark was Bishop of Jerusalem, the first gentile to do so.<br />Proceded by: James the Just (to 62)Simeon I (62-107)Justus I (107-112)Zacchaeus (112-116)Tobias (?)Benjamin I (?-117)John I (117-119)Matthew I (119-120)Philip (?-124)Senecas (?)Justus II (?)Levi (?)Ephraim I (?)Joseph I (?)Judas (?-134)<br /><br /><br />Pius I was Bishop of Rome.<br />Preceded by: St Peter, St. Linus (67-76)St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)St. Clement I (88-97)?St. Evaristus (97-105)St. Alexander I (105-115)St. Sixtus I (115-125) (Xystus I)St. Telesphorus (125-136)St. Hyginus (136-140)<br /><br />Cornelius was Bishop of Antioch.<br />Preceded by: St. Peter the Apostle (c.45-c.53)St. Euodios (c.53-c.68)St. Ignatius I (c.68-100)Eros I (100-c.127)<br /><br />Mark II was the Bishop of Alexandria.<br />Preceded by: Mark 42-68Anianus (68-82)Avilius (82-98)Kedron (96-106)Primus (110-121)Justus (121-131)Eumenis (131-144)Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01915100833433055951noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-43017759567685613072013-05-16T03:31:59.846-07:002013-05-16T03:31:59.846-07:00Justin Martyr was not a Roman Catholic...
But fo...<i> Justin Martyr was not a Roman Catholic... </i><br /><br />But forgetfulness having taken possession of theminds of men, through the long-suffering of God, hasacted recklessly in transferring to mortals the name which is applicable to the only true God; and from the few the infection of sin spread to the many, who were blinded by popular usage to the knowledge of that which was lasting and unchangeable. For the men of former generations, who instituted private and public rites in honour of such as were more powerful, caused forgetfulness of the <b>Catholic faith </b>to take possession of their posterity; but I, as I have just stated, along with a God-loving mind, shall employ the speech of one who loves man, and set it before those who have intelligence, which all ought to have who are privileged to observe the administration of theuniverse, so that they should worship unchangeably Him who knows all things. --Justin Martyr , On the Sole Government of God Chapter 1<br /><br />"This is stated by <b>Justin,</b> one of our distinguished writers who lived not long after the time of the apostles. Concerning him I shall speak in the proper place. Take and read the work of this man, <b>who in the first Apology</b> which he addressed to Antonine <b> in behalf of our religion </b> writes as follows..."--Eusebius Church History Book I chapter 13<br /><br />Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01915100833433055951noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-24798078890836244702013-05-15T02:45:47.825-07:002013-05-15T02:45:47.825-07:00Neither did Christianity itself! The Mass that Ju...Neither did Christianity itself! The Mass that Justin writes about was secretly for the Angel Moroni. That's what he meant, not the real presence. There was no universal Church created by Christ at Pentecost. It was merely symbolic that man could create his own Church from scripture.<br /><br />Keep kidding yourself and making up new history to suit your worldview. That's what progressives do.<br /><br />Here's the latest you should know about Total Sola Scriptura:<br /><br />Scripture does not say it needs an interpreter so any claim it does is false. The elect don't need to interpret scripture because scripture is plainly clear and no additional interpretation is needed for the elect. If additional interpretation is needed you aren't part of the elect. If you add any word to scripture to interpret it you've diluted God's word and now include traditions of men. Scripture is all you need and the elect will automatically become literate when in the presence of the Word.<br /><br /><br />Removing all sense of logic, reason and history is fun. The problem is the heretical doctrines that develop from man who keeps trying to make the world and history in his own image. cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-9112483852149421562013-05-14T19:35:11.920-07:002013-05-14T19:35:11.920-07:00Roman Catholicism did not exist at the time of Jus...Roman Catholicism did not exist at the time of Justin Martyr. That's just a fact of history and theology. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-7227972508170634202013-05-14T19:29:27.527-07:002013-05-14T19:29:27.527-07:00Justin Martyr was not a Roman Catholic.
Oh pleas...<i>Justin Martyr was not a Roman Catholic. </i><br /><br />Oh please.<br /><br />No one may share the Eucharist with us unless he believes that what we teach is true, unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.<br /><br /> We do not consume the eucharistic bread and wine as if it were ordinary food and drink, <b>for we have been taught that as Jesus Christ our Savior became a man of flesh and blood by the power of the Word of God, so also the food that our flesh and blood assimilates for its nourishment becomes the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus by the power of his own words contained in the prayer</b> of thanksgiving.<br /><br /> The apostles, in their recollections, which are called gospels, handed down to us what Jesus commanded them to do. They tell us that he took bread, gave thanks and said: Do this in memory of me. This is my body. In the same way he took the cup, he gave thanks and said: This is my blood. The Lord gave this command to them alone. Ever since then we have constantly reminded one another of these things. The rich among us help the poor and we are always united. For all that we receive we praise the Creator of the universe through his Son Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit.<br />On Sunday we have a common assembly of all our members, whether they live in the city or the outlying districts. The recollections of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as there is time. When the reader has finished, the president of the assembly speaks to us; he urges everyone to imitate the examples of virtue we have heard in the readings. Then we all stand up together and pray.<br /><br /> On the conclusion of our prayer, bread and wine and water are brought forward. The president offers prayers and gives thanks to the best of his ability, and the people give assent by saying, “Amen”. The eucharist is distributed, everyone present communicates, and the deacons take it to those who are absent.<br /><br /> The wealthy, if they wish, may make a contribution, and they themselves decide the amount. The collection is placed in the custody of the president, who uses it to help the orphans and widows and all who for any reason are in distress, whether because they are sick, in prison, or away from home. In a word, he takes care of all who are in need.<br /><br /> We hold our common assembly on Sunday because it is the first day of the week, the day on which God put darkness and chaos to flight and created the world, and because on that same day our savior Jesus Christ rose from the dead. For he was crucified on Friday and on Sunday he appeared to his apostles and disciples and taught them the things that we have passed on for your consideration.“Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01915100833433055951noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-32675170169408285122013-05-14T19:09:01.469-07:002013-05-14T19:09:01.469-07:00Good interpretations of Scripture are based on the...Good interpretations of Scripture are based on the facts of Scripture. That's why Calvinism is so powerful and has not been refuted by its enemies. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-87004083809743093982013-05-14T18:06:52.122-07:002013-05-14T18:06:52.122-07:00Nick -
I think you have a title for a new article...Nick -<br /><br />I think you have a title for a new article: "Total Sola Scriptura."<br /><br />If Ps let anything be "grounded" or "inferred" in scripture (ex. the Trinity, Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed) they should reject these man made constructs because its not stated in scripture. Just like total depravity, man can't any any role in his salvation or properly interpret God's word. cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-66757739653289467512013-05-14T18:05:22.036-07:002013-05-14T18:05:22.036-07:00Upon what authority is your interpretation of scri...Upon what authority is your interpretation of scripture better than anyone else?<br /><br />I didn't ask for 5 points being "grounded" in scripture. That's not enough. Total sola scriptura like total depravity. Otherwise, you start bringing in extra-biblical, man made interpretations if it's not total sola scriptura. Of course, once you go down that road you could never figure out the Trinity.<br /><br />cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-54657448315628790032013-05-14T15:22:55.751-07:002013-05-14T15:22:55.751-07:00cwdlaw,
Your pretty messed up in your understandin...cwdlaw,<br />Your pretty messed up in your understanding. Scripture does indeed need to be interpreted as do your church teachings. There is no way to understand something without interpreting and each person who hears or reads interprets. <br />Even your doctrines are the result of interpretations. <br /><br />btw- the 5 points of Calvinism are grounded on Scripture. Take Total Depravity. It is based on "Man’s heart is evil (Mark 7:21-23) and sick Jer. 17:9). Man is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20). He does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12). He cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14). He is at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15). And, is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2:3)." http://www.calvinistcorner.com/tulip.htmAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-26012932398996859232013-05-14T14:52:59.115-07:002013-05-14T14:52:59.115-07:00John Calvin was not a Calvinist. The Pope was a Pr...John Calvin was not a Calvinist. The Pope was a Protestant. If you write it down it must be true.<br /><br />Just keep making up fiction and hoping that history changes so your theological progressivism works.<br /><br />There is nothing in scripture about "5 points" and such heresy should be rejected for violating sola scriptura. Scripture doesn't need to be interpreted. Scripture is Scripture. Just state scripture. That's all you need. Nothing more, nothing less. It says so in the index: No Interpreter Needed.cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-4783996907056247262013-05-14T10:25:20.522-07:002013-05-14T10:25:20.522-07:00Berhane,
Justin Martyr was not a Roman Catholic. ...Berhane,<br /> Justin Martyr was not a Roman Catholic. Be that as it may, Justin is not referring to Hebrews 6. He makes no reference to it. What does “he who is illuminated is washed" mean in reference to Jesus?<br /><br /><br />In Hebrews 6:2 the word you have for “baptisms” is also translated “washings” in the NASB which refers to the OT Levitical system. There were many ceremonial cleansings, which were outward signs of heart cleansing (cf. Ex 30:18–21; Lv 16:4, 24, 26, 28; Mk 7:4, 8). If the author is referring to the Old Testament it would mean washings and not baptisms since there are no baptism in the Old Testament. Even the NAB seems to concur in verse 4 in a footnote that its not baptism that is being referred to. “ Enlightened and tasted the heavenly gift: this may refer to baptism and the Eucharist, respectively, but more probably means the neophytes' enlightenment by faith and their experience of salvation."<br /><br />In regards to the term “repentance” in verse 6 means a change of mind from evil to good or from good to better. If they have turned from Christ they cannot turn again to Him since it is impossible to renew them again to repentance. To “renew” means to “to renew, Occurs only in Heb. 6:6, meaning to have a new or qualitatively different kind of repentance which would see the person who had it through to the very end. “ They may have repented but it was not a repentance that was lasting. <br /><br />The “TULIP” is not the best acronym for the 5 points of Calvinism. What matters is that the 5 points are true and biblical. <br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-54317331449373525682013-05-13T23:03:25.985-07:002013-05-13T23:03:25.985-07:00Ralph:
you:Why use sources outside the NT to unde...Ralph:<br /><br />you:Why use sources outside the NT to understand the NT? Why don't you use RC sources?<br /><br />me: this is damned if you do, damned it you don't type question, "why did you use an RC source" "why didn't you use an RC source." "the Pope was in hitler youth because hes a monster" "the pope left Hitler youth showing he's a deserter" (I've seriously had someone tell me the last one). If you looked up the reference you'd have seen sT Justin Martyr in the 2nd century on this matter:<br /><br />And this washing is called illumination, because they who learn these things are illuminated in their understandings. And in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Ghost, who through the prophets foretold all things about Jesus, he who is illuminated is washed."<br />Justin Martyr,First Apology,61(A.D. 110-165),in ANF,I:183<br /><br />In addition I already mentioned the Peshitta.<br /><br />you:Baptism is not mentioned in Heb 6 <br /><br />me: Please read verse 2.<br /><br />you:and it has nothing to do with being a enlightened. <br /><br />me: verse 2 again, see St Justin Martyr. And of course you'd reject any insinuation of baptism regeneration, despite its massive undeniable historical support.<br /><br />you:This is where I wish you RC's had some support from your infallible interpreter then we could deal with what your church teaches rather than your private interpretations that are off the mark. <br /><br />me: Not everything must be ex cathedra declared by the Papacy, if there's been no dispute over a verse, to a Catholic the fact the Father had consensus on a version, especially in regards to a matter such as baptism, is good enough and is BINDING on them to believe. You will see Fathers in East and West stating Hebrews 6:4 is referring to a person not being allowed to be REBAPTIZED, this verse was significant when there were heretics in the early days that took you view that sinner could not rejoin the Church, or when people rebaptized people who were in heretical sects.<br /><br />you:Their "first repentance" would not have been genuine given that they have fallen away. <br /><br />me: too bad nothing direct says, or even hints at implying this is referring to fake repentance are just going off of the Calvinist need to keep your TULIP from being a TULI.<br />Berhane Selassiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06611383094868702883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-25852555883486178302013-05-13T06:30:58.301-07:002013-05-13T06:30:58.301-07:00Nick, I don't know what's going on, but yo...Nick, I don't know what's going on, but you've really been on fire lately. Keep up the good work!Steve Daltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07365458906085087105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-85312431532989384702013-05-12T19:08:22.132-07:002013-05-12T19:08:22.132-07:00Only a nut would claim a Catholic Church Council i...Only a nut would claim a Catholic Church Council is not part of Rome. There is no hope for you. The world is flat!<br /><br />Keep avoiding and obfuscating history so your false, made up gospel will work. Next the Arian heresy didn't exist. You take for granted the pillars of Christian theology laid down by Rome as though they were obvious. Post modern man hard at work.<br /><br />There is no scripture but/for Rome. It's the Church created by Christ and therefore the only thing on earth that has such authority to determine scripture that you take for granted and remove seven books from the OT because they're too Catholic.cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-58754337937424116702013-05-12T18:21:55.880-07:002013-05-12T18:21:55.880-07:00Nonsense. Rome is not necessary to understand the ...Nonsense. Rome is not necessary to understand the Scripture. If anything, Rome is an obstacle to understanding the Scripture given how they have used their doctrines to pervert the Scripture. <br /><br />The Council of Chalcedon was convened by Emperor Marcian and not the bishop of Rome. It was at this council that determine the nature of Christ. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-68635794869534198272013-05-12T18:17:07.580-07:002013-05-12T18:17:07.580-07:00Berhane,
Why use sources outside the NT to unders...Berhane,<br /> Why use sources outside the NT to understand the NT? Why don't you use RC sources?<br /><br />Baptism is not mentioned in Heb 6 and it has nothing to do with being a enlightened. <br /><br />This is where I wish you RC's had some support from your infallible interpreter then we could deal with what your church teaches rather than your private interpretations that are off the mark. <br /><br />Their "first repentance" would not have been genuine given that they have fallen away. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-75810273819916503302013-05-12T18:07:57.886-07:002013-05-12T18:07:57.886-07:00My point about Jesus being both man and God is los...My point about Jesus being both man and God is lost upon you. You would never, ever have come to that conclusion without Rome. Look up the Arian heresy. It was much worse than Protestantism. Man can come up with twisted version of the gospel (like you do) with just plain reasoning. The supernatural is necessary or man believes anything.cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-21039700786692876682013-05-12T18:07:08.946-07:002013-05-12T18:07:08.946-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-83230083275830292552013-05-12T18:05:25.879-07:002013-05-12T18:05:25.879-07:00"The "natural-dead in his sins" man..."The "natural-dead in his sins" man cannot respond-believe by his own efforts."<br /><br />Why don't you just say that man is forced against his will to believe and can't cooperate with grace?<br /><br />You preach a gospel of determinism in which no gospel is necessary. The elect are already saved and wouldn't need to hear anything. <br /><br />There's a reason nobody in history believed in total depravity until the Reformers made up their twisted version of Christianity off the back of Rome.<br /><br />I never met a Calvinists who thought they were part of the non-elect. Intoxicating feeling to believe that you're saved but others are not. Intellectual Pride at work. <br /><br />You are completely wrong, misguided and state a false gospel. <br /><br />cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-63580510590611353892013-05-12T17:58:53.385-07:002013-05-12T17:58:53.385-07:00The "natural-dead in his sins" man canno...The "natural-dead in his sins" man cannot respond-believe by his own efforts. It takes the work of God to make it possible. Without it, nothing can happen and in fact this man thinks the things of God are foolishness. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-33305644400808081192013-05-12T17:55:16.818-07:002013-05-12T17:55:16.818-07:00How could there not be limited atonement given tha...How could there not be limited atonement given that only the elect (Eph 1:4) are those for whom Christ died? <br /><br />Keep in mind that there was a lot of superstitious theologies before the Protestant Reformation. That's why doctrines like limited atonement were unknown for the most part. The Bible was not being taught nor preached in this period that much if at all. One of the things the reformers brought back was biblical preaching. <br /><br />Jesus is fully God and fully man. You should read Phil 2:5-8. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-59036079121085629982013-05-12T17:45:55.425-07:002013-05-12T17:45:55.425-07:00Here is an excellent article that summarizes the d...Here is an excellent article that summarizes the debate correctly:<br /><br />http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/05/did-christ-die-for-all-or-just-many.html<br /><br />Calvinists believe that the elect "will" believe (not would or might believe) and man has no ability whatsoever to cooperate with grace or not. cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-78382299655713929852013-05-12T17:43:23.510-07:002013-05-12T17:43:23.510-07:00Because limited atonement for the "elect"...Because limited atonement for the "elect" isn't taught in scripture or tradition. It is a man made idea made up during the Reformation to make their theology fit. <br /><br />How could Jesus be both a man and God? You don't allow for any mystery/supernatural in your thinking and which is why you interpret scripture incorrectly. cwdlaw223https://www.blogger.com/profile/02451813257438815066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-27812197371702343742013-05-12T17:34:08.439-07:002013-05-12T17:34:08.439-07:00Clint,
How could there not be limited atonement ...Clint,<br /> How could there not be limited atonement when many will be condemned and few saved? see Matt 7:13-14. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4588905705506605875.post-45673250320804161372013-05-12T15:56:02.214-07:002013-05-12T15:56:02.214-07:00Anonymous: I wont have much time in the next week ...Anonymous: I wont have much time in the next week or two to answer much, what I will say is Catholic does not believe in penal substitution, so we do not have to worry about universalism, that's the worry of 4 point Calvinists and others that want to believe in unlimited atonement and penal sub.<br /><br />Illumination in the ancient world, in Christianity and Judaism (as well as other religions) referred to baptism. Here is what Jewish encyclopedia says:<br /><br />The expression that the person baptized is illuminated (φωτισθείς, Justin, "Apologiæ," i. 65) has the same significance as is implied in telling a proselyte to Judaism, after his bath, that he now belongs to Israel, the people beloved of God (Yeb. 47a; Gerim i.).<br /><br />You will also see the Peshitta text using the BAPTISM instead of enlightenment.<br /><br />you: To be a “partaker” and “have tasted” does not mean they have salvation. During the ministry of Jesus many heard Him teach and saw His miracles and may have personally benefited from them but that does not mean that were regenerated. Its like many people today who are in churches who hear the gospel and serve in the church and yet are not regenerated. <br />Where are you getting the idea of baptism in this passage?<br /><br />me: this is the same Calvinist song and dance ive heard for years. It says the PARTOOK of the HOLY SPIRIT, it doesn't say they receieved, it says PARTOOK, no mention of miracles, or hearing some really good preaching. Heb 3:1 uses similar wording. I honestly I don't believe you think your explanation of partakers is a good one, generally this is a point the Calvinists I've discussed with were quick to move away from. <br /><br />Nick already addressed this verse in a previous enter. You make it sound like if these people are elect, but leave the church, thinking they were saved, but were not YET, cannot come back. The verses says to "repentance AGAIN," do you think their first repentance was fake too?Berhane Selassiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06611383094868702883noreply@blogger.com