Rome's tactics.

[Carbon]

The RC Church has given people a religion that will allow them to indulge in their sinful lusts and yet still appear to be Christians.
holding to a form of godliness although they have denied its power; avoid such people as these. 2 Tim 3:5.

One of the first things they do, (along with Arminians) is remove regeneration, the removing the corrupt nature into the image of God. This keeps many in the RCC and keeps them from going to a true church.

The RCC replaces the inward regenerating work of the Holy Spirit with the outward ordinance of baptism. So, the outward ordinance of baptism replaces the inward regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.

The next thing the RCC does is provide a substitute for the internal sanctification of the whole person.

Thought? comments so far?

 

[fastfredy0]

Thought? comments so far?

Can a person who follows R.C. theology per the R.C. church be saved assuming he does not change?
I tend to say No ... what's your opinion and why?

 

[makesends]

The RC Church has given people a religion that will allow them to indulge in their sinful lusts and yet still appear to be Christians.
holding to a form of [a]godliness although they have denied its power; avoid such people as these. 2 Tim 3:5.

One of the first things they do, (along with Arminians) is remove regeneration, the removing the corrupt nature into the image of God. This keeps many in the RCC and keeps them from going to a true church.

The RCC replaces the inward regenerating work of the Holy Spirit with the outward ordinance of baptism. So, the outward ordinance of baptism replaces the inward regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.

The next thing the RCC does is provide a substitute for the internal sanctification of the whole person.

Thought? comments so far?

The very power of the Gospel is denied, in essence. To them, the Spirit of God is powerless to regenerate, until given permission by the recipient. All the poetic statements about synergistic love, etc, cannot change that fact.

 

[GoKart Mozart]

Can a person who follows R.C. theology per the R.C. church be saved assuming he does not change?
I tend to say No ... what's your opinion and why?

Yes.
I know where salvation is, I can't say where it isn't.

 

[Arch Stanton]

Can a person who follows R.C. theology per the R.C. church be saved assuming he does not change?

Yes, Christ established His Catholic Church, protected it with the Holy Spirit, and has no expiration date.

 

[GoKart Mozart]

The RC Church has given people a religion that will allow them to indulge in their sinful lusts and yet still appear to be Christians.
holding to a form of [a]godliness although they have denied its power; avoid such people as these. 2 Tim 3:5.

One of the first things they do, (along with Arminians) is remove regeneration, the removing the corrupt nature into the image of God. This keeps many in the RCC and keeps them from going to a true church.

The RCC replaces the inward regenerating work of the Holy Spirit with the outward ordinance of baptism. So, the outward ordinance of baptism replaces the inward regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.

The next thing the RCC does is provide a substitute for the internal sanctification of the whole person.

Thought? comments so far?

I'm not Roman Catholic, nor an apologist for the RCC but I googled and read the RCC Catechism concerning baptism and what you stated appears to be false. According to the linked catechism document, Baptism in the RCC is symbolic of the regeneration and the removal of sin (all sin, including "original sin") which is a "Grace" accomplished by the "Holy Trinity (which includes the Holy Spirit)."

What you said may very well be true of Arminians, or some Arminians, I can't say. There are too many variations to comment in a way that would fit all of them.

 

[makesends]

I'm not Roman Catholic, nor an apologist for the RCC but I googled and read the RCC Catechism concerning baptism and what you stated appears to be false. According to the linked catechism document, Baptism in the RCC is symbolic of the regeneration and the removal of sin (all sin, including "original sin") which is a "Grace" accomplished by the "Holy Trinity (which includes the Holy Spirit)."

What you said may very well be true of Arminians, or some Arminians, I can't say. There are too many variations to comment in a way that would fit all of them.

In the same way that government's law is not just what is written, but what is enforced (or what is practiced when not enforced), the written doctrines of the church are not all the church teaches and practices, much of which is in direct opposition to what is written. I have had long discussions with someone well versed in RCC, and the some of what it claims is very good doctrine, until you read some of the rest of it. There is a lot of "both sides of the fence" going on there —just saying. I'm not going to take the time I don't have to look it up, but don't take my word for it. Just understand, that what is claimed is not all that is practiced.

Also understand that not every country, nor every parish, does the same as the others.

 

[Arch Stanton]

I have had long discussions with someone well versed in RCC, and the some of what it claims is very good doctrine, until you read some of the rest of it.

Someone well versed could be an anti-Catholic with an agenda.

 

[GoKart Mozart]

In the same way that government's law is not just what is written, but what is enforced (or what is practiced when not enforced), the written doctrines of the church are not all the church teaches and practices, much of which is in direct opposition to what is written. I have had long discussions with someone well versed in RCC, and the some of what it claims is very good doctrine, until you read some of the rest of it. There is a lot of "both sides of the fence" going on there —just saying. I'm not going to take the time I don't have to look it up, but don't take my word for it. Just understand, that what is claimed is not all that is practiced.

Also understand that not every country, nor every parish, does the same as the others.

I think I understand your comment. otoh, the same disclaimer could be made of almost every/any faith group, it's not exclusive to the RCC.

As anecdotal evidence: my 50~ years in Baptist churches have shown me a wide variety of belief and practice, sometimes even within the same congregations. I see the same variety demonstrated on the pages of this forum, ymmv.

 

[Arch Stanton]

I think I understand your comment. otoh, the same disclaimer could be made of almost every/any faith group, it's not exclusive to the RCC.

As anecdotal evidence: my 50~ years in Baptist churches have shown me a wide variety of belief and practice, sometimes even within the same congregations. I see the same variety demonstrated on the pages of this forum, ymmv.

For some reason I thought you were Orthodox... not sure when I thought that -- My wife was a life-long Baptist and even did missionary work in Morocco and Tunisia....she recently converted to Catholicism

 

[GoKart Mozart]

For some reason I thought you were Orthodox... not sure when I thought that -- My wife was a life-long Baptist and even did missionary work in Morocco and Tunisia....she recently converted to Catholicism

My earliest recollections of church are in the Particular Baptist Church where my grandfather was a pastor/moderator. In my elementary school years we moved and my parents attended an Independent Baptist (Independent, fundemental, missionary KJV only.. it was all on the sign) Church. My senior year of HS I started attending SBC, with one two year stint in a Methodist Church, that's where I was until about 10 years ago.

Oddly (ironically?) enough, it was a comment concerning the cup in the Lord's Supper that was the final straw for me.
I had often wondered why we only celebrated the Supper on the evenings of a fifth Sunday in a month (sometimes only twice a year).. anyway.. I digress.. After the bread had been distributed/recieved and the cup distibuted, the pastor raised the cup and said (in effect but this is close to verbatim), "This is just grape juice. We bought it at the Kroger across the street, there's nothing special about this... (then onto some words about a memorial)."
My thought was, if that's true, why bother at all? My lifetime of study and research did lead me elsewhere. I was Charismated ito the Orthodox Church on Lazarus Saturday 2014.

 

[Arch Stanton]

My earliest recollections of church are in the Particular Baptist Church where my grandfather was a pastor/moderator. In my elementary school years we moved and my parents attended an Independent Baptist (Independent, fundemental, missionary KJV only.. it was all on the sign) Church. My senior year of HS I started attending SBC, with one two year stint in a Methodist Church, that's where I was until about 10 years ago.

Oddly (ironically?) enough, it was a comment concerning the cup in the Lord's Supper that was the final straw for me.
I had often wondered why we only celebrated the Supper on the evenings of a fifth Sunday in a month (sometimes only twice a year).. anyway.. I digress.. After the bread had been distributed/recieved and the cup distibuted, the pastor raised the cup and said (in effect but this is close to verbatim), "This is just grape juice. We bought it at the Kroger across the street, there's nothing special about this... (then onto some words about a memorial)."
My thought was, if that's true, why bother at all? My lifetime of study and research did lead me elsewhere.

The Eucharist is pretty powerful!!!

Blessings my friend!!!

 

[Carbon]

Can a person who follows R.C. theology per the R.C. church be saved assuming he does not change?
I tend to say No ... what's your opinion and why?

I agree, I'd say no also. But I believe we both agree, regeneration comes first. Since that is the case, the person will change.

 

[Carbon]

The very power of the Gospel is denied, in essence. To them, the Spirit of God is powerless to regenerate, until given permission by the recipient. All the poetic statements about synergistic love, etc, cannot change that fact.

Amen!

 

[Carbon]

I'm not Roman Catholic, nor an apologist for the RCC but I googled and read the RCC Catechism concerning baptism and what you stated appears to be false.

Well then, things arent always as they appear. I have a very good understanding of RC doctrine. They believe in baptismal regeneration. If you disagree, find a correct source. Ask a Catholic perhaps?

According to the linked catechism document, Baptism in the RCC is symbolic of the regeneration and the removal of sin (all sin, including "original sin") which is a "Grace" accomplished by the "Holy Trinity (which includes the Holy Spirit)."

What you said may very well be true of Arminians, or some Arminians, I can't say. There are too many variations to comment in a way that would fit all of them.

Friend, it's more than symbolic.

 

[Carbon]

Someone well versed could be an anti-Catholic with an agenda.

Yep, thats possible.

But not in all cases.

 

[Carbon]

The next thing the RCC does is provide a substitute for the internal sanctification of the whole person.

Yep.
The Church of Rome provides a substitute for sanctification, the spiritual mortification of sin and obediance.
They do this so the conscience will be satisfied, and sin may continue to reign and be indulged.

The substitues are, daily masses, indulgencies, and if worse come to worse - purgatory.

Purgatory IMO is a horrible anti-chriatian doctrine. Think about it, it enables a sinner to remain unrepentent and removes the fear of a future punishment.
Confessions, penances and the giving of alms enables men to continue to live in their sins and at the same time to pacify their consciences.

 

[Carbon]

It seems Rome has given a religion which will allow men to continue to indulge their sinful lusts and yet, still appear to be Christian.
holding to a form of godliness although they have denied its power; avoid such people as these. 2 Tim 3:5.

 

[GoKart Mozart]

Well then, things arent always as they appear. I have a very good understanding of RC doctrine. They believe in baptismal regeneration..

Baptismal Regeneration in one form or another is held by a significant portion of Christianity. Almost all, if not all, of the earliest expressions of Christianity link regeneration with baptism. It's not the domain of the RCC only.

However, that's not what you said in your OP. You said they (RC's) "remove regeneration, the removing the corrupt nature into the image of God.."
Baptismal Regeneration is still regeneration and the removal of sin (including "original sin"), even if it differs from your view. Section 1215 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "This sacrament [baptism] is also called 'the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit,'

If you disagree, find a correct source. Ask a Catholic perhaps?

I disagreed with your statement(s) that RC's "remove regeneration" and "replace the work of the Holy Spirit." They don't, nor does baptismal regeneration in general.
That correct source for RC doctrine would be the Catechism of the Catholic Church which once again states: "This sacrament [baptism] is also called 'the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit,'
Regeneration for RCs still involves the work of the Holy Spirit. It says so right there in their catechism.

Perhaps contrasting the views of Baptismal Regeneration between faith groups or with the latter medieval innovation of some Reformers could be enlightening (maybe??).
otoh, I suppose it wouldn't be as provocative as your polemic. Heaven knows I fell for it.
Lord have mercy.

 

[Carbon]

Baptismal Regeneration in one form or another is held by a significant portion of Christianity. Almost all, if not all, of the earliest expressions of Christianity link regeneration with baptism. It's not the domain of the RCC only.

I never said it was only RC.

However, that's not what you said in your OP. You said they (RC's) "remove regeneration, the removing the corrupt nature into the image of God.."

I know what I said, but do you understand what I said? If I remember, you said you were not a Roman Catholic, so how can you be so sure of what they teach?

Baptismal Regeneration is still regeneration and the removal of sin (including "original sin"), even if it differs from your view. Section 1215 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "This sacrament [baptism] is also called 'the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit,'

There is no support for baptismal regeneration in scripture. Hopefully you are or will be beginning to see what I am saying.

I disagreed with your statement(s) that RC's "remove regeneration" and "replace the work of the Holy Spirit." They don't, nor does baptismal regeneration in general.

But that is exactly what they do, whether you agree with me or not, don't matter. They remove it by re-interpretation into a false doctrine.

That correct source for RC doctrine would be the Catechism of the Catholic Church which once again states: "This sacrament [baptism] is also called 'the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit,'

This is the second time you posted this and you still don't see it?

Regeneration for RCs still involves the work of the Holy Spirit. It says so right there in their catechism.

Their doctrine of baptismal regeneration is not biblical.

Perhaps contrasting the views of Baptismal Regeneration between faith groups or with the latter medieval innovation of some Reformers could be enlightening (maybe??).

Do you think this is the first time I looked into this? FYI I was born and raised RC. At a young age, I stopped going to Church. My mother remained RC. Since then, I have studied the religion quite extensively. It was one of my interests.
Should I just throw all my education away and believe what you have to say about it, with very limited knowledge and never being a RC? Come on now, you have to do better than that.

otoh, I suppose it wouldn't be as provocative as your polemic. Heaven knows I fell for it.
Lord have mercy.