Post published by One Eyed Owl
I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
And in Jesus Christ, His only begotten Son, Our Lord; who was
conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under
Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into Hell. On the third day he rose from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
from there he shall come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church, the communion
of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the
life everlasting.
Amen.
Chapter Master Azrael, Deleted Account, Deleted Account and 2 others like this.
more_vert
hillmountain
BASIL:. "Letter 295 (329-379 ad)
Faith and works must be joined: so shall the man of God be perfect, and his life not halt through any imperfection.
For the faith which saves us, as saith the Apostle, is that which worketh by love."
more_vert
Run_Like_Joseph_Did
You dodge. You just can’t stand the correction. If you think I’m cherry picking I left you the sources. Joseph Fitzmyer was a Jesuit historian back when the Jesuits still had a pair.
Deleted Account likes this.
more_vert
hillmountain
It's you who are dodging.... The quotes from the fathers (that you supposedly claim support faith alone) that I provided are Crystal clear..
more_vert
hillmountain
"Faith without works of justice is not sufficient for salvation; neither is righteous living secure in itself of salvation, if it is disjoined from faith." -Gregory of Nyssa. How much more clearer can this get?
more_vert
hillmountain
And see how even a child can understand that "faith alone" contradicts scripture:. "“Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.". ". "“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.". -what many people who go to hell will hear from JESUS..
more_vert
hillmountain
Even Jesus himself is crystal clear that a lack of good deeds can endanger salvation...... Why then do you blindly support Luther's false interpretation of scripture? You guys claim that you can understand scripture by personal interpretation ... Why then refuse to give up Luther's false interpretation?
more_vert
hillmountain
In "the rich man and Lazarus", THE RICH MAN WENT TO HELL BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HELP THE BEGGAR LYING OUTSIDE HIS GATE ( A GOOD WORK)... NOTHING IS MENTIONED ABOUT HIS FAITH OR LACK THEREOF...... So obviously even Jesus warns that good deeds are needed for salvation, and salvation is not decided by "faith alone"
more_vert
Run_Like_Joseph_Did
you dont seem to understand what protestants mean by sola fide. I encourage you to check out the threads in this group that go into detail on the issue. better yet, try reading some Sproul or Carson. Maybe some MacArthur. seek to some genuine understanding of our position. I don't have time to give a detailed resosponse to every 10+ posts that come after my comment. try the forums. maybe we could even start a private conversation to go back and forth. I would appreciate that and i hope would find it useful too.
more_vert
hillmountain
Nice way to avoid the actual evidence.... ""Faith without works of justice is not sufficient for salvation; neither is righteous living secure in itself of salvation, if it is disjoined from faith." -Gregory of Nyssa. ". Even a baby can understand the meaning of quotes like this.. I've read much more of the Father's than you, and they are Catholic in their doctrines... one doesn't need to have read the entire works to understand this plain statement......
more_vert
hillmountain
"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin.”
– Ambrose, Sermon 22:30 (A.D. 388). Does this sound like modern Catholic teaching on Mary, or does it sound like P teaching about Mary?
more_vert
Run_Like_Joseph_Did
No Protestant denies that by the late fourth century, Mary was widely accepted as perpetual virgin pre partum, in partu, and post partum. It’s true history can be traced to the third century in the church and finds roots in pseudo gnostic documents like the Protoevangelium of James you can’t trace wide spread belief of perpetual virginity of Mary before the third century. Which is coincidentally around the same time when monasticism exploded out of the eastern church. In other words, Ambrose was wrong on this issue.
more_vert
Run_Like_Joseph_Did
We could talk about the immaculate conception and how it was a late fourth century innovation that finds no roots for the first 4 centuries as defined by poi’s ic in 1854 in that convo
more_vert
hillmountain
You fail to appreciate a principle of history: the immaculate conception was WIDELY acknowledged in various places (by jerome, Ambrose, Augustine in North Africa etc....). That means, they didn't invent it on their own, and were only articulating and developing on already held views on the immaculate conception
more_vert
hillmountain
So the apostles Creed was also compared in the 4th century.... So why do you accept that alone?
more_vert
hillmountain
When you encounter evidence from the early church that contradicts your beliefs, you just raise the bar for evidence much higher...... Or ignore it outright....... I've just provided a lot of evidence against Sola fide from the church fathers (even though you tried to claim that the same fathers supported Sola fide). And now you just dismiss and reject any evidence
more_vert
hillmountain
You say Ambrose was wrong? Then Jerome, Augustine, ephrem the Syrian and so many other fathers and the early church, who supported the sinlessness of Mary, were wrong, while Martin Luther and Calvin were right?