Colin and Baptism.

[Paphnutius]

Wonderful posts Ironmonk! I find it hard for some people to continue to state that the Catholic Church is unbiblical with so much evidence right there.

[Colin]

Dear Ironmonk,
Thank you for your irenic reply!
How do I know I am filled with God's Holy Spirit? Firstly because he promised to do so for all who believed (John 14: 12-21 "Truly, truly, I say to you, [b]He who believes on Me[/b], the works that I do he shall do also, and greater works than these he shall do, because I go to My Father.
And whatever you may ask in My name, that I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
If you ask anything in My name, I will do it.
If you love Me, keep My commandments.
And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, so that He may be with you forever,"
Jesus here clearly stipulates to whom the Holy Spirit will be given - "he who believes on me"

Secondly, I know that I love Jesus with all my heart, that he has given me a love for his word, that he convicts and guides and comforts me. I know my shepherd's voice. Equally, to quote Philippians 3:12, "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect, but I am pressing on, if I may lay hold of that for which I also was taken hold of by Christ Jesus."

Concerning your quotes on the place of works, I would say our deeds reveal the truth of our call. I would see your Revelation verse as more the judgment of non-believers, ours being described in 1 Corinthians 3:12-16. Here our salvation is not the issue (1 Corinthians 3:15), but certainly it is a serious and awesome event. I try to die daily to self, and am painfully aware of my shortcomings!!

Regarding the matter of authority, we have a genuine difference of opinion. I would see the authority as being in the Bible, God’s authoritative self-revelation, and the teaching of the Apostles therein, and would view that authority as always resting in the Scriptures themselves. As long as anyone, early church leader or new convert in China, continues in those teachings, he is authorized by God himself. I do think you overplay the authority as sacred lineage idea. Paul was not appointed apostle by Peter or any other of the originals, yet he rebuked Peter to his face when he went against the gospel. Peter did not reply, "who made you an apostle, I’m the head of the church, you are out of line", rather he recognized Paul's rebuke as just (the wisdom from above being open to reason), and backed down. Who appointed Jeremiah or Amos "I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet", what hierarchy authorized Mary? By her time, an authorized hierarchy, temple, priests etc, had been functioning for over a thousand years. Do not discount God's ability to sovereignly choose, appoint, and call. Clearly such a system can be called into question/abused (as can yours), but equally clearly God is alive and active, and through his word, his Spirit and the council of believers, the wisdom from above remains open to reason, and we still know each other by our fruits.

Concerning the early church fathers, I have no idea what later writing Logos has added to the Prod version, or why. I have read some of them (several years ago now), and would remark on how differently they treat the Scriptures to their own words. They may disagree or discuss an issue, yet always the words of the Bible, Old and New Testament, are utterly beyond dispute, accepted as totally authoritative. They give them a reverence they do not give either themselves or each other. I am more familiar with the Talmud, and this is also certainly the case there re the Old Testament. A recognition that their words are fallible, but that this word is not. That it is of a different species entirely. We would not agree with Origen's (from memory - or was it Justin Martyr's?) view of the Holy Spirit, for example, as being less than the Father or Son. Yet of no verse of Scripture would you say, "this is wrong". You recognize that not everything in every church father is correct, something quite unlike your approach to Scripture.

Thanks again for discussing these things with me, I do appreciate your kindness,
God bless, Colin

[ironmonk]

Colin,

I'm sorry that this is so long but you bring up quite a few good points and sometimes it is hard to convey everything on a forum.

[quote][color=blue]Dear Ironmonk,
Thank you for your irenic reply! [/color][/quote]

And thank you for yours. It is great to dialog with non-Catholics who do not use Jack Chick tracts for their Catholic Church info.

[quote][color=blue]How do I know I am filled with God's Holy Spirit? Firstly because he promised to do so for all who believed (John 14: 12-21 "Truly, truly, I say to you, He who believes on Me, the works that I do he shall do also, and greater works than these he shall do, because I go to My Father.
And whatever you may ask in My name, that I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
If you ask anything in My name, I will do it. [/color][/quote]
There are others who believe the same thing yet contradict what you believe. I do not understand how it can be the one faith (Eph. 4:5) if there are contradictions because truth cannot contradict truth.

I ask a favor... please say this prayer daily for at least week... please meditate on it and be led by the spirit...
"O God, I humbly beseech thee to teach me thy true religion,
that leads to everlasting happiness,
through Jesus Christ thy Son, our Lord. Amen."

[quote][color=blue]If you love Me, keep My commandments.
And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, so that He may be with you forever,"
Jesus here clearly stipulates to whom the Holy Spirit will be given - "he who believes on me"[/color] [/quote]

Christ tells us that some believe for a time and fall away. So we must always be on our gaurd. If some fall away and they thought they had the Spirit, although they didn't, how can you be certain?

[quote][color=blue]Secondly, I know that I love Jesus with all my heart, that he has given me a love for his word, that he convicts and guides and comforts me. I know my shepherd's voice. Equally, to quote Philippians 3:12, "Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect, but I am pressing on, if I may lay hold of that for which I also was taken hold of by Christ Jesus."[/color] [/quote]

I too have a love for Christ and God's word. I'm glad we can share this common ground. It will help us both come closer to Christ.


[quote][color=blue]Concerning your quotes on the place of works, I would say our deeds reveal the truth of our call. I would see your Revelation verse as more the judgment of non-believers, ours being described in 1 Corinthians 3:12-16. Here our salvation is not the issue (1 Corinthians 3:15), but certainly it is a serious and awesome event. I try to die daily to self, and am painfully aware of my shortcomings!![/color] [/quote]

I understand your point, but that is not the context of what the verses say. If we look at what the first Christians wrote about them, it is not what they taught either. Faith without works is dead, and works without faith are dead (James 2:14-26). Faith and works are of equal need. Saying that works are a product of faith is the same thing as saying that works are needed. Someone could have faith and not works - others might say that he had no faith; but there is nothing in the bible that tells us that is a proper test. Who are we to judge that man's heart? If good works where the product of faith then we couldn't have good works without faith. We can have good works without faith, and we can have faith without good works. For many will cry "Lord, Lord" and Christ will not allow them into Heaven because they did not have good works (St. Matt. 25:11-46).


[b]James 2:22 [/b]
You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by the works.

When something is "active with" that means that they are carrying an equal burden. Faith was incomplete without works. In this same chapter we see that works are useless without faith.


[quote][color=blue]Regarding the matter of authority, we have a genuine difference of opinion. I would see the authority as being in the Bible, God’s authoritative self-revelation, and the teaching of the Apostles therein, and would view that authority as always resting in the Scriptures themselves.[/color] [/quote]

I understand where you are coming from. But did you know that anytime you see the word "Scripture" in the bible it is talking about the Septuagint? The Septuagint was the only collection of books that were considered Scripture by Jew and Christian alike until 90 AD when the Jews took books out and created the Messorah.

All of the books and letters in the New Testament where written in the first century, but it wasn't until 400 AD when all Christians accepted the 27 books of the New Testament as Scripture. The canonization process took many years. St. Augustine was one of the Bishops involved.

Council of the African Church held at Hippo (393 AD) (Where St. Augustine was bishop)
Council of Carthage (397 AD)
Pope Innocent I was the pope that sent out the list of books in the New Testament to all of the Churches. I think in 405 AD.

There were over 200 books considered to be included in the New Testament Scripture, but the councils which were guided by the Holy Spirit as promised in St. John 14, where all Catholic Bishops. If the Catholic Church is not the Church established by God, then by what authority did they have to choose the books when we all say are the Word of God?

Here is a thread I had with a guy that went by Circle Master... he loves to use circular arguments hence patience being an issue with him, but you might find it interesting...
[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=5722"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=5722[/url]

The bible is only the written Word of God... there is also sacred traditions as spoken of in the NT, and by the Early Church Fathers.

[quote] [color=blue]As long as anyone, early church leader or new convert in China, continues in those teachings, he is authorized by God himself. [/color]
[/quote]

Where is that in the bible? If he was authorized by God himself, then why do we all disagree on the meanings of the scriptures. We see in the Scriptures that private revelation can misguide us.

[b]2 Peter 1:20 [/b]- Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

[b]2 Peter 3:16 [/b]- As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.

[b]Acts 8:30-35[/b] - And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest? [b]31 [/b]Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. [b]32 [/b]And the place of the scripture which he was reading was this: He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb without voice before his shearer, so openeth he not his mouth. [b]33 [/b]In humility his judgment was taken away. His generation who shall declare, for his life shall be taken from the earth? [b]34 [/b]And the eunuch answering Philip, said: I beseech thee, of whom doth the prophet speak this? of himself, or of some other man? [b]35 [/b]Then Philip, opening his mouth, and beginning at this scripture, preached unto him Jesus.


We must be careful of being misguided when we read the Scriptures. Just as the Apostles warned. To know the meaning of Scriptures we must look at them as a whole and study what the first Christian taught. Since Christ said the Church would never be overcome, and there is to be only One Faith... then we must find the faith that has been taught for almost 2000 years. I love Christ, God is my first priority. I love Him, so I want to know everything I can about Him. So I started in 33 AD... and the first 400 years of Christianity are deeper than you can imagine... and that was before the New Testament.


[quote][color=blue]I do think you overplay the authority as sacred lineage idea. [/color][/quote]


I understand why you would. We see lineage first in Acts when they replaced Judas (Acts 1:20). We see that the Apostles held a place of office. The office does not die with a Bishop, a new Bishop replaces the one that left.

[b]Acts 1:20 [/b]
For it is written in the Book of Psalms: 'Let his encampment become desolate, and may no one dwell in it.' And: 'May another take his office.'
[b]21 [/b]Therefore, it is necessary that one of the men who accompanied us the whole time the Lord Jesus came and went among us,
[b]22 [/b]beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us, become with us a witness to his resurrection."
[b]23 [/b]So they proposed two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also known as Justus, and Matthias.
[b]24 [/b]Then they prayed, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen
[b]25 [/b]to take the place in this apostolic ministry from which Judas turned away to go to his own place."
[b]26 [/b]Then they gave lots to them, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was counted with the eleven apostles.

We see that the teaching authority is passed on by ordination...

[b]Acts 6:6 [/b]
They presented these men to the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them.

[quote][color=blue]Paul was not appointed apostle by Peter or any other of the originals, yet he rebuked Peter to his face when he went against the gospel. [/color] [/quote]

Paul was appointed by Christ. Why do you think it was so significant for the authors of the Gospel to include a rebuke by Paul? Because it was a big thing to rebuke him, because Peter was the leader. We see Jesus only prayed for Peters faith and we see that Jesus told Peter to feed His sheep and verified that Peter loved Him 3 times... this was because Peter was going to deny him three times.

[b]John 21:15 [/b]
When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "[color=red]Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" [/color]He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "[color=red]Feed my lambs[/color]."
[b]16 [/b]He then said to him a second time, "[color=red]Simon, son of John, do you love me?" [/color]He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "[color=red]Tend my sheep[/color]."
[b]17 [/b]He said to him the third time, "[color=red]Simon, son of John, do you love me?" [/color]Peter was distressed that he had said to him a third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." (Jesus) said to him, "[color=red]Feed my sheep[/color]."

[ironmonk]

[quote][color=blue]Concerning the early church fathers, I have no idea what later writing Logos has added to the Prod version, or why. I have read some of them (several years ago now), and would remark on how differently they treat the Scriptures to their own words. They may disagree or discuss an issue, yet always the words of the Bible, Old and New Testament, are utterly beyond dispute, accepted as totally authoritative. They give them a reverence they do not give either themselves or each other. [/color][/quote]


The Early Church Fathers did not refer to the New Testament, they refered to their teachings of the Gospels. There were readings of the New Testament books during Masses, but they were not considered Scripture until 400 AD. There were disagreements and disputes, just as in Acts, when all the fathers came together to discuss the faith and settle it. At this time when all the leaders of the Church are together is when God guides the Church in all truth (St. John 14) and the Church cannot be wrong on matters of faith and morals. The Church will never be overcome and it will be one faith. None of the Early Church Fathers accepted the bible as the authority. The bible is the inspired writings of the Holy Spirit. The bible cannot settle a dispute, the Church settles disputes.

[b]St. Matt 18:17 [/b]
If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.


[quote][color=blue]I am more familiar with the Talmud, and this is also certainly the case there re the Old Testament. A recognition that their words are fallible, but that this word is not. [/color][/quote]

The high priest of the Jews before Christ was infallible. As we see in the Gospels it points out that the High Priest is guided by the Holy Spirit and other places shows that the High Priest teaches from the Chair of Moses.

Also, there are many non-Catholics and even some Catholics who misunderstand what infallible means. Infallible means that the teachings of the faith or morals cannot be wrong. Interpretation of Scripture falls into infallible for the Magisterium of the Church. We believe this because Jesus told the Church in St. John that they would be guided in all truth, and in St. Luke Christ tells them "He who hears you, hears me.".

Something to consider, if you think that everyone is guided by the Holy Spirit when they read the bible, then that would mean that they were infallible... because if the Holy Spirit guided them, they would all be right and agree.

[quote] [color=blue]That it is of a different species entirely. We would not agree with Origen's (from memory - or was it Justin Martyr's?) view of the Holy Spirit, for example, as being less than the Father or Son. Yet of no verse of Scripture would you say, "this is wrong". You recognize that not everything in every church father is correct, something quite unlike your approach to Scripture. [/color][/quote]


I agree that not everything the Early Church Fathers wrote is correct, but there is a common thread to all of them. They all agreed that the Pope was the successor of Peter, they believed in all the Sacraments, their beliefs were all Catholic. Some did schism, but their schisms did not last.

Here are some quotes from the two Catholics that you mention... they write of forgiveness of sins by a priest, the Eucharist Real Pressence, Mary Ever Virgin, the need of Baptism, etc...

[b]Justin Martyr[/b]

But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation.(First Apology 65 [A.D. 151]).

"Whoever are convinced and believe that what they are taught and told by us is the truth, and professes to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to beseech God in fasting for the remission of their former sins, while we pray and fast with them. Then they are led by us to a place where there is water, and they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn: ‘In the name of God, the Lord and Father of all, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit,’ they receive the washing of water. For Christ said, ‘Unless you be reborn, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven’" (First Apology 61:14–17 [A.D. 151]).

"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus" (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

"God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve [minor prophets], as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: ‘I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord, and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands; for from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, my name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering, for my name is great among the Gentiles . . . [Mal. 1:10–11]. He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us [Christians] who in every place offer sacrifices to him, that is, the bread of the Eucharist and also the cup of the Eucharist" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 41 [A.D. 155]).

"[Jesus] became man by the Virgin so that the course which was taken by disobedience in the beginning through the agency of the serpent might be also the very course by which it would be put down. Eve, a virgin and undefiled, conceived the word of the serpent and bore disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy when the angel Gabriel announced to her the glad tidings that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her and the power of the Most High would overshadow her, for which reason the Holy One being born of her is the Son of God. And she replied ‘Be it done unto me according to your word’ [Luke 1:38]" (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 100 [A.D. 155]).


[b]Origen[/b]
"It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism" (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 [A.D. 235]).

"You cannot deny that you are aware that in the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter; the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head—that is why he is also called Cephas [‘Rock’]—of all the apostles; the one chair in which unity is maintained by all" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [A.D. 367]).

"[A final method of forgiveness], albeit hard and laborious [is] the remission of sins through penance, when the sinner . . . does not shrink from declaring his sin to a priest of the Lord and from seeking medicine, after the manner of him who say, ‘I said, "To the Lord I will accuse myself of my iniquity"’" (Homilies on Leviticus 2:4 [A.D. 248]).

"Formerly there was baptism in an obscure way . . . now, however, in full view, there is regeneration in water and in the Holy Spirit. Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’ [John 6:55]" (Homilies on Numbers 7:2 [A.D. 248]).

"Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3 [A.D. 248]).

"The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

"Look at [Peter], the great foundation of the Church, that most solid of rocks, upon whom Christ built the Church [Matt. 16:18]. And what does our Lord say to him? ‘Oh you of little faith,’ he says, ‘why do you doubt?’ [Matt. 14:31]" (Homilies on Exodus 5:4 [A.D. 248]).

"[I]f we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens" (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).

"The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity" (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]).


[quote][color=blue]Thanks again for discussing these things with me, I do appreciate your kindness,
God bless, Colin[/color][/quote]

Thank you. Again I ask this favor as a reminder... please say this prayer daily for at least week... please meditate on it and be led by the spirit...
"O God, I humbly beseech thee to teach me thy true religion,
that leads to everlasting happiness,
through Jesus Christ thy Son, our Lord. Amen."


Your servant in Christ,
ironmonk

[Aloysius]

[quote]any ideas why quote will not work above?[/quote]

it appears there is a limit of quote tags you can use in one post. hope you don't mind my tweaking to figure out the mystery and fix it for you.

-Aloysius

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Feb 23 2006, 05:10 AM']it appears there is a limit of quote tags you can use in one post.  hope you don't mind my tweaking to figure out the mystery and fix it for you.

-Aloysius
[right][snapback]895450[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

cool... thanks

I spent almost two hours last night writing that then another 30 minutes going over it looking for what was wrong. Hence why I need the large carmel iced coffee from Dunkin' Donuts this morning.

God Bless!
ironmonk

[ironmonk]

Colin,
I hope you haven't forgot about us. We're praying for you.

God Bless,
ironmonk