Never-Ending List Of Requirements For Salvation

[Guest Shadyrest]

[font="arial"][size="2"][color="#595959"][font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"]
Knight of Christ informs us....

"What the Bible Says about salvation....
To be saved, you must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31), but the Sacred Scriptures show other things you must also do to be saved."

* You must endure to the end. Matthew 10:22, Matthew 24:13, Mark 13:13.
* You must accept the Cross (suffering). Matthew 10:38, Matthew 16:24-25, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23, Luke 14:27.
* You must be baptized with water. Mark 16:16, John 3:3-5 Titus 3:5, I Peter 3:20-21.
* You must be a member in God's true church. Acts 2:47.
* You must confess your sins. James 5:16, I John 1:9
* You must keep the Commandments of God. Matthew 5:19-20, Matthew 7:21
* You must heed the words of St. Peter, the first Pope. Acts 11:13-14, Acts 15:7.
* You must eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus Christ. John 6:51-58, I Corinthians 10:16, I Corinthians 11:23-29
[/size][/font][/color]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"][color="#595959"][size="4"]Knight's list only gave us half the picture. In addition, other things necessary for salvation (NFC) are:[/size][/color][/size][/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="arial, verdana, sans-serif"][size="4"][color="#595959"][size="4"][color="#000000"][font="arial, sans-serif"][size="2"]
[size="3"][color="#666666"]1) Being a member of the [i][b]Roman[/b] [/i]Catholic Church is N.F.S. ([i]"Wherefore it has at all times been necessary that every particular church---that is to say, the faithful throughout the world--should agree with the [b]Roman Church...[/b]" [/i]Vatican 1, chapter 2 of, "On the Perpetuity of the Primacy of Blessed Peter in the Roman Pontiffs". [i] [/i][/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]2) Penance is N.F.S. (CCC #1446)[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]3) Reliance on Mary to bring you the gifts of eternal salvation is N.F.S. (CCC #969)[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]4) Being in subjection to the Pope is N.F.S. (V-1)[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]5) Human suffering is N.F.S. ("We must suffer for our sins...it is a matter of justice" ......Keating, [i]Catholicism & Fundamentalism[/i], p. 194)[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]6) "Sorrow and Misery"[/color][color="#666666"] are N.F.S. "Sins must be expiated through the sorrows and misery and[/color][color="#666666"] trials of life" (V-2)[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]7) The sacraments are N.F.S. (Trent, session 7).[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]8) Indulgences are N.F.S. "The church commands the use of indulgences...for the task of winning salvation" (V-2)[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]9) Service & Witness are N.F.S. (CCC #1816)[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]10) Purgatory is N.F.S. (sins are "atoned" for in that divine waiting[/color][/size]
[size="3"][color="#666666"]room (Catholic Encyclopedia).[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]11) Punishments are N.F.S. We can, " [/color][/size][size="3"][color="#666666"]make satisfaction to God the Father, not only by punishments voluntarily undertaken by ourselves to atone for sins, or by those imposed by the judgment of the priest accordinag to the measure of our offense, but also, and[/color][color="#666666"] this is the greatest proof of love, by the temporal afflictions imposed by God and[/color][color="#666666"] borne patiently by us."[/color][/size]

[size="4"][color="#666666"] [/color][/size][size="3"][color="#666666"]12) Good works[/color][color="#666666"] are N.F.S. "We are justified by Christ...and[/color][color="#666666"] by good works." (Catholic Encyclopedia, under "Justification", as well as the Council of Trent).[/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]13) Heaven is gained by, "right conduct, with the help of God's law and[/color][color="#666666"] grace, and [/color][color="#666666"]through conduct that fulfills the commandment of charity" (CCC #16).[/color][/size]


[size="3"][color="#666666"]Needless to say, no one can EVER have peace of mind wondering if they have lived up to all these demands. If the apostle Paul went out of his way to EXCLUDE the greatest law system ever given to man as the means for our justification (Acts 13:39) it is absolutely UNTHINKABLE that he would approve of some LESSER law, like Roman Catholicism with all [/color][u][color="#666666"]her[/color][/u][color="#666666"] requirements, to rise up and[/color][color="#666666"] take its place. [/color][/size]

[size="3"][color="#666666"]Unfortunately, Catholics have absolutely no idea what it means to be released from all these burdens and to "enter into His [b]REST[/b]" (Heb 4:3, 10). [/color][/size]

[/size][/font][/color][/size][/color][/size][/font][/size][/font]

[Jaime]

Did you have a question Shady?

[CatherineM]

Seems to be upset about something.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='jaime (the artist formerly known as hot stuff) (the artist formerly known as hot stuff)' timestamp='1287953682' post='2182141']Did you have a question Shady?
[/quote]



Well, for starters, have you kept all the commandments? If not, then according to Knight of Christ, I suppose it's off to hell you go, since that's one of the requirements he posted. And before you reply that Jesus told the young ruler to keep the commandments, I will forewarn you that not one biblical scholar on earth believes that the Lord meant he should keep all the commandments [i]perfectly. [/i] So to just say, "we must keep the commandments" and leave it at that, is nothing but a works salvation and "another gospel" (2 Cor 11:4).
[font="times new roman"][size="6"] [/size][/font]
Second, the stipulation that we must obey Peter as Pope, with reference to the book of Acts, are deceitful citations that do not speak of Peter's popery [i]in the least! [/i]If Peter was Pope, why was he merely the first speaker and not [u]presiding[/u] over the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15? (over which James quite obviously presided). Why didn't they just turn the whole matter over to Peter? Instead, we read that James said, "Hear me!"---and [u]he[/u] was the one who gave the judgment in vs. 19, saying, "I JUDGE" in the Greek, which is variously translated as "It is my judgment" (NASB), "my sentence is" (KJV), and "I have reached the decision" (RSV).

[CatherineM]

Perhaps my RSV is different than yours, but it is clear that Peter's decision at the Council of Jerusalem ended the debate. You can additionally see the hand of the Holy
Spirit guiding him since he was originally on James' side of the issue rather than Paul's.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1287959139' post='2182162']
Perhaps my RSV is different than yours, but it is clear that Peter's decision at the Council of Jerusalem ended the debate. You can additionally see the hand of the Holy
Spirit guiding him since he was originally on James' side of the issue rather than Paul's.
[/quote]


Your statement is categorically false. It is simply astonishing that you are bent on letting your tradition guide your understanding, instead of reading what the Text actually says. The real issue is that you wish that the Holy Spirit had put the words of James, into the mouth of Peter, [i] but it was not to be so; nor did the Holy Spirit give any hint of Peter presiding over the church in the entire New Testament! It was [b]Paul [/b] who said that " the care of ALL the churches comes upon me daily!" [/i](2 Cor 11:28). The Bible nullifies Catholic claims literally at every turn.

[dairygirl4u2c]

it is ironic, that even noncatholics, those who rely on faith only, usually dont give straight answers.
what must you do?

believe in jesus. no, that's not enough cause even demons 'believe' in him. believe he's god? demons do. believe he's savior? maybe, but different people have different conceptions of what that means, does it matte which conception they have? also, what about- believe he was raised from the dead, and/or confess with your mouth that he is lord? that's pretty biblical, but what abotu the other requirements? how does that fit with the requirement of savior? what if one is believed but the other isn't?
does it matter if hte prson simply doesn't know a certain thing from the above list, or how does it affect things if they reject a certqain thing?

usualy, even if ya get the fundamentlist to start listing things, then you run into the issue of it being dogmatic and mroe and more exclusive than something simply like just believing or believing he's savior.

what exactly, even using pureer faith standards regarless of works or religion, does one have to believe?

personally, i dont think you can peg this things as a science.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1287962535' post='2182174']
The Bible nullifies Catholic claims literally at every turn.
[/quote]
Really? I guess we were really stupid for putting the bible together then.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' timestamp='1287965546' post='2182182']
it is ironic, that even noncatholics, those who rely on faith only, usually dont give straight answers.
what must you do?

believe in jesus. no, that's not enough cause even demons 'believe' in him. believe he's god? demons do. believe he's savior? maybe, but different people have different conceptions of what that means, does it matte which conception they have? also, what about- believe he was raised from the dead, and/or confess with your mouth that he is lord? that's pretty biblical, but what abotu the other requirements? how does that fit with the requirement of savior? what if one is believed but the other isn't?
does it matter if hte prson simply doesn't know a certain thing from the above list, or how does it affect things if they reject a certqain thing?

usualy, even if ya get the fundamentlist to start listing things, then you run into the issue of it being dogmatic and mroe and more exclusive than something simply like just believing or believing he's savior.

what exactly, even using pureer faith standards regarless of works or religion, does one have to believe?

personally, i dont think you can peg this things as a science.
[/quote]

Catholicism complicates the gospel by not giving us a straight answer, and I'm sorry to say, you're a prime example.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1287966463' post='2182183']
Really? I guess we were really stupid for putting the bible together then.
[/quote]

Would you kindly tell me just exactly when it was that the Roman Catholic Church "put together the Bible"? Thank you.

[KnightofChrist]

Wow another thread made in my name, I suppose I should be honored.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1287968245' post='2182186']
Catholicism complicates the gospel by not giving us a straight answer, and I'm sorry to say, you're a prime example.



[/quote]

Non-Catholics make the gospel overly simplistic. One needs a teacher to learn the true message of the Gospel, and that teacher is Mother Church. Oh ps Dairy is not catholic.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1287968345' post='2182187']
Would you kindly tell me just exactly when it was that the Roman Catholic Church "put together the Bible"? Thank you.



[/quote]

I'll let Cath answer the question. But the Church adopted the Canon that Christ and the Apostles (catholics) used. It was not until Martin Luther that books of the bible were ripped out, that he based on a very Anti-Christian Jewish Council. A council convened AFTER our Blessed Lord ascended into heaven, meaning that council had no power what-so-ever. Luther also wanted to remove the book of James.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1287958093' post='2182159']
Well, for starters, have you kept all the commandments? If not, then according to Knight of Christ, I suppose it's off to hell you go, since that's one of the requirements he posted. And before you reply that Jesus told the young ruler to keep the commandments, I will forewarn you that not one biblical scholar on earth believes that the Lord meant he should keep all the commandments [i]perfectly. [/i] So to just say, "we must keep the commandments" and leave it at that, is nothing but a works salvation and "another gospel" (2 Cor 11:4).
[font="times new roman"][size="6"] [/size][/font]
Second, the stipulation that we must obey Peter as Pope, with reference to the book of Acts, are deceitful citations that do not speak of Peter's popery [i]in the least! [/i]If Peter was Pope, why was he merely the first speaker and not [u]presiding[/u] over the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15? (over which James quite obviously presided). Why didn't they just turn the whole matter over to Peter? Instead, we read that James said, "Hear me!"---and [u]he[/u] was the one who gave the judgment in vs. 19, saying, "I JUDGE" in the Greek, which is variously translated as "It is my judgment" (NASB), "my sentence is" (KJV), and "I have reached the decision" (RSV).
[/quote]

Popery. Awesome word.

[Micah]

You guys are a bunch of papists. Especially Catherine, Erin and Knight. I can smell the popery from here.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Micah

[havok579257]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1287968345' post='2182187']
Would you kindly tell me just exactly when it was that the Roman Catholic Church "put together the Bible"? Thank you.
[/quote]


before your leader martin luther changed words in the bible and took books out of the bible. thats just fact. the catholic bible was in play before martin luther broke off. not to mention you follow a bible that a simple man (martin luther) changed. go check your facts and see from martin luthers own writing, he changed the bible so it reads faith alone since he believed thats what it should read.

[Micah]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1287971472' post='2182205']
before your leader martin luther changed words in the bible and took books out of the bible. thats just fact. the catholic bible was in play before martin luther broke off. not to mention you follow a bible that a simple man (martin luther) changed. go check your facts and see from martin luthers own writing, he changed the bible so it reads faith alone since he believed thats what it should read.
[/quote]

I believe it says something in the Bible about the type of men who add to or take away from the Word of God.

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287968921' post='2182191']
Non-Catholics make the gospel overly simplistic. One needs a teacher to learn the true message of the Gospel, and that teacher is Mother Church. Oh ps Dairy is not catholic.
[/quote]


[i]"The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple'" (Ps 19:7)[/i]
[i]
[/i]
[i]"I have more understanding than all my teachers, for thy testimonies are my meditation" (Ps 119:99).[/i]
[i]
[/i]
[i]"Ye need not that any man teach you" (1 Jn 2:27).
[/i]

[Guest Shadyrest]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1287971472' post='2182205']
before your leader martin luther changed words in the bible and took books out of the bible. thats just fact. the catholic bible was in play before martin luther broke off. not to mention you follow a bible that a simple man (martin luther) changed. go check your facts and see from martin luthers own writing, he changed the bible so it reads faith alone since he believed thats what it should read.
[/quote]




[font=Georgia,]Apparently, you're not up to date. Mr. Luther didn't "change" anything. He was merely expressing what others had gone on record before him had already done; namely that if we are not justified by the deeds of the law, as Scripture teaches, then what's left? [i]Faith alone. [/i][/font]
[font=Georgia,][i] [/i]Pope Benedict XVI stated "[color="#ff0000"]Luther’s expression sola fide is true if faith is not opposed to charity, to love" (Wednesday Audience, Nov. 19, 2008).[/color][/font]
[font="Georgia,"][size="4"][size=2]And since not one of Luther's books was opposed to charity, the Pope now agrees that M.L. was not out of order at all. I know this must be a shock to your system, so I advise laying down with a cool washcloth on the forehead, with a little witchhazel dabbed on for good measure. [/size][/size][/font]

[havok579257]

[quote name='Shadyrest' timestamp='1287973778' post='2182219']
[font=Georgia,]Apparently, you're not up to date. Mr. Luther didn't "change" anything. He was merely expressing what others had gone on record before him had already done; namely that if we are not justified by the deeds of the law, as Scripture teaches, then what's left? [i]Faith alone. [/i][/font]
[font=Georgia,][i] [/i]Pope Benedict XVI stated "[color="#ff0000"]Luther’s expression sola fide is true if faith is not opposed to charity, to love" (Wednesday Audience, Nov. 19, 2008).[/color][/font]
[font="Georgia,"][size="4"][size=2]And since not one of Luther's books was opposed to charity, the Pope now agrees that M.L. was not out of order at all. I know this must be a shock to your system, so I advise laying down with a cool washcloth on the forehead, with a little witchhazel dabbed on for good measure. [/size][/size][/font]
[/quote]


the pope does not agree with martin luther but nice try. the pope does not agree you are saved with faith alone.

fact is martin luther changed the bible. when he broke off from the catholic church he changed the bible. the bible which is the written word of God. so your saying its ok for a man to change the bible when he thinks its ok. you think God is not infalliable and that the gospel writers were not inspired by the holy spirit and that it is not infallible writing.

keep up the unchristian attitude, it looks like your just about to convert the majority of the board.