Catholic Flowchart Vs. Christian Flowchart

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Truthseeker777' post='1210574' date='Mar 8 2007, 08:25 PM']THese kids are cute too.
But their actions are not quite biblical?
[url="http://www.remnantofgod.org/pix/dagon_jpg_view.htm"]Cute Catholic kids.[/url][/quote]What's next? An Old Testament command to bow before a bronze serpeant? Or maybe a New Testament believer trying to get healed by getting under the shadow of St. Peter? Oops.

I love the remnant of god website. I go there when I need a good laugh.

Edited March 9, 2007 by Mateo el Feo

[FullTruth]

[url="http://www.the-tabernacle-place.com/images/tabernacle_drawing.jpg"]Old Testament Tabernacle[/url]
Sacrifice first, Washing second, Holy of the Holiess last.
Repentance first, Baptism second, Infilling of the holy ghost third.

Not that chaotic mess of the path of Catholic Salvation on that chart.

[FullTruth]

[img]http://www.the-tabernacle-place.com/images/tabernacle_drawing.jpg[/img]
Sacrifice first, Washing second, Holy of the Holiess last.
Repentance first, Baptism second, Infilling of the holy ghost third.

Not that chaotic mess of the path of Catholic Salvation on that chart.

[FullTruth]

[img]http://www.the-tabernacle-place.com/images/tabernacle_drawing.jpg[/img]
Sacrifice first, Washing second, Holy of the Holiess last.
Repentance first, Baptism second, Infilling of the holy ghost third.

Not that chaotic mess of the path of Catholic Salvation on that chart.

Edited March 9, 2007 by FullTruth

[FullTruth]

[img]http://www.the-tabernacle-place.com/images/tabernacle_drawing.jpg[/img]
Sacrifice first, Washing second, Holy of the Holiess last.
Repentance first, Baptism second, Infilling of the holy ghost third.

Not that chaotic mess of the path of Catholic Salvation on that chart.

[FullTruth]

Opps, multiple postings, sorry.

[Brother Adam]

There is nothing chaotic or messy about Catholic soteriology. It's actually very concise and beautiful. Your ability or willingness to understand it though may be what is in question. I was telling another Protestant that there is no reason salvific methodology can't be summed up as John 3:16. But scripture necessitates interpretation - interpretation gets complex, as is its nature. Like Arius our Protestant friends here gather a few verses that they like and make a theology out of it. Theology though is not simple, Catholic or Protestant. The Catholic flowchart represents a simple look at the Catholic theology of salvation, not the Catholic message of salvation. For that, one simply needs to read the Gospels. I would exercise extreme caution when attempting to develop ones own theology by coming up with ones own method of exegesis and then leaning on ones own interpretation of the Bible. This type of individualism is only condoned in amateur Protestant circles. I believe it is why this Internet debate forum has attracted so many individualist Protestant thinkers as it has. The crowd is really quite unique, each one here for a self serving purpose having developed their own individual theology which is capable of jumping to different circles and really never "getting on point". It would never survive real debate, but in a way it is "fertilized" here because there really are no ground rules.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Budge' post='1210102' date='Mar 7 2007, 09:51 PM']Socrates youre a smart guy, cant you do a better job of answering my posts then this?
Dont know anything about that.
Thats funny given Catholics repeat the same 5-7 verses over and over, Ill give Knight of Christ credit, thats the most scripture Ive seen a Catholic use, even in a copy and paste![/quote]
This is an odd charge, given that Knight posted about 22 Scripture passages in this thread alone, while you just post "flowcharts".

And are you saying the object of Scriptural debate is to see who can paste the most Scriptural quotes in a thread?
I've noticed overall the Catholics here are using far more Scriptural arguments than yourself, so you lose even by that standard. And more importantly, they are able to argue coherently from Scripture. Your preferred modus operandi is to just copy and paste a lot of pictures and garbage from some anti-Catholic website.
Everytime it comes down to actually debating Scripture, you get schooled!

And you seem unable to give any satisfactory response to certain Scripture passages which defy your own beliefs, which is why they get repeated over and over. If you were a real Bible Christian, you wouldn't simply brush aside any part of Scripture which does not conform to your personal agenda.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1210609' date='Mar 8 2007, 09:03 PM']Sacrifice first, Washing second, Holy of the Holiess last.
Repentance first, Baptism second, Infilling of the holy ghost third.

Not that chaotic mess of the path of Catholic Salvation on that chart.[/quote]I think this quote about a "chaotic mess" is not really of a reasoned response, but instead a purely emotional one. If you'd like to follow the path of reason, it would be helpful to identify the things that you found chaotic or messy, so we at least had a chance to reply to your objections.

[FullTruth]

Most of the flow chart for the Catholic thoughts on salvation requires works. Do this, do that, and you get into heaven. Second, the purgatory. Heaven is timeless, so when you die, there is no time. You don't need any time to be purified once you die. You either enter heaven, or hell.

There seems so much to it, so complex.

The way God forgave the sins of Israel in the old testament was sacrifice first, the priest washing himself in the laver second, and going into the holy of the holiess third to sprinkle the blood on the Ark of the covenant.

The way God currently forgives sins now is repentance first (sacrifice/You starting the new birth experience), baptism second (the circumcision of the heart/You being born again of the water/washing of the priesthood), and infilling of the holy ghost third (the spirit filling the new tabernacle/temple/YOU being born again of the spirit!) Acts 2:38, which was Peter's, the first 'Pope' message to humanity.

What a promise!

God's way has always been Sacrifice, washing and filling things with his spirit to bring blessings into the world.

Edited March 9, 2007 by FullTruth

[KnightofChrist]

[i]Budge is in italic [/i]

[b]KnightofChirst is in BOLD[/b]


[i]Sure....{Im with you there}

And with the HOly Spirit indwelling one will be given the strength to endure to the end. [/i]

[b]Yes, but this gift of the Holy Spirit does not override free will, one can still choose to reject God before he or she dies.[/b]

[i]You dont have to suffer for your own salvation. Now one may suffer persecution and for the gospel, but one does not have to suffer to earn their salvation. Jesus completed the job.
Baptism is a ordinance of salvation. That is what saves. The thief on the cross was never baptized. There is no "magic" in the water making you saved. It is a sign of your salvation.[/i]

[b]Do we have to suffer? Perhaps not, some are lucky and may never have to suffer. But if we do suffer we [u]must accept [/u]the suffering. The Good Thief was baptized, by the baptism of desire, the good thief also did a work stood up and spoke out for Christ against the evil thief. [/b]

[b]Watering baptism down to just an ordinance is rather un-biblical, and depressing. Baptism consese of water and spirit, water and spirit. What spirit? The Holy Spirit! Our baptism is like that of Christ' baptism, do you recall Christ baptism? In Holy Baptism, the Holy Spirit descends upon us and we become a child of God. And true there is no "magic" in the water... But there is The Spirit and the water.[/b]

[b]I will never understand non-catholics who accuse the Church for having all shorts of "symbols" yet turn around and view the two most holy things in Christ Church as "just symbols"... its so sad... and hypocritical.[/b]

[i]If you are born again in Jesus Christ, that is automatic.
Sure, but to even become saved, you must repent. The Holy Spirit will call a Christian to continued repentance.

Sure but one sin doesnt cast you out as the adopted member of God's family.

Rom 8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

The Holy Spirit chastises Christians who do sin. I know this myself.[/i]

[b]It was my understanding you did not believe in one true church, now you do? No one that is unforgiven will enter heaven, unrepented sins are unforgiven. [/b]

[i]Again you folks confuse justification with sanctification. [/i]

Accusations of confusion from the confused... Justification is married to Sanctification.

[i]And I do, peter as one of the apostles taught many good thins, such as telling Cornelius to stand, Silver and Gold I have none and much more.
[/i]

[b]Peter is head of the Apostles, not just like all the others but the leader the rock, the key holder. The only other one other than Christ to walk on water!
[/b]

[i]I have done what Jesus CHrist mandated as that is symbolic, the eating of the WORD, becoming born again.[/i]

[b]The belief that Christ is symbolic is depressing... you have not obeyed Christ if you take His command as only symbolic. [/b]

[i]It is not literal cannabalism.
Does this verse mean someone is actually supposed to go eat paper and ink?

Moreover He said to me, "Son of man, eat what you find; eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel." So I opened my mouth, and He caused me to eat that scroll (Ezekiel 3:1, 2).
[/quote][/i]

[b]Nice try two different authors with two different meanings... context means something.
[/b]

[jeffpugh]

Seems accurate enough for quotations Knight. I have read it all and they are fair but just don't forget to use ellipsis next time to let us know that you're flash forwarding a bit. That is all.

[KnightofChrist]

Yes, sorry about that... being lazy, and I was short of time, at hum the time...

[Resurrexi]

[quote]STM, your quotes from St. Pius X only provide for Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire. They do not say that unbaptized infants are damned. They answer of a definitive positive answer does not mean that we should assume the negative.[/quote]I'll give another quote:

[quote][b]The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X:[/b]
11 Q. When should infants be brought to the Church to be baptised?
A. Infants should be brought to the Church to be baptised as soon as possible.

12 Q. Why such anxiety to have infants receive Baptism?
A. There should be the greatest anxiety to have infants baptised because, on account of their tender age, they are exposed to many dangers of death, and cannot be saved without Baptism.

13 Q. Do parents sin, then, who, through negligence, allow their children to die without Baptism, or who defer it?
A. Yes, fathers and mothers who, through negligence, allow their children to die without Baptism sin grievously, because they deprive their children of eternal life; and they also sin grievously by putting off Baptism for a long time, because they expose them to danger of dying without having received it.
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM[/url][/quote]

[quote name='Mr.CatholicCat']The first is that infants whom do not have Sacramental Baptism are eternally dammed, if such a user would be willing to answer how the Holy Innocents (feast day of the church) could be indeed saved? Moreover could such a user provide a document of the Church holding authority states that infants cannot attain salvation in one of the other forms of Baptism that we have been made aware of?[/quote]

[quote][b]The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X:[/b]
17 Q. Can the absence of Baptism be supplied in any other way?
A. [u]The absence of Baptism can be supplied by martyrdom, which is called Baptism of Blood[/u], or by an act of perfect love of God, or of contrition, along with the desire, at least implicit, of Baptism, and this is called Baptism of Desire.
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM[/url][/quote]

[quote][b]The 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia article 'Holy Innocents':[/b]
It is impossible to determine the day or the year of the death of the Holy Innocents, since the chronology of the birth of Christ and the subsequent Biblical events is most uncertain. All we know is that the infants were slaughtered within two years following the apparition of the star to the Wise Men (Belser, in the Tubingen "Quartalschrift", 1890, p. 361). [u]The Church venerates these children as martyrs (flores martyrum)[/u]; they are the first buds of the Church killed by the frost of persecution; they died not only for Christ, but in his stead (St. Aug., "Sermo 10us de sanctis"). In connection with them the Apostle recalls the words of the Prophet Jeremias (xxxi, 15) speaking of the lamentation of Rachel. At Rama is the tomb of Rachel, representative of the ancestresses of Israel. There the remnants of the nation were gathered to be led into captivity. As Rachel, after the fall of Jerusalem, from her tomb wept for the sons of Ephraim, so she now weeps again for the men children of Bethlehem. The ruin of her people, led away to Babylon, is only a type of the ruin which menaces her children now, when the Messias is to be murdered and is compelled to flee from the midst of His own nation to escape from the sword of the apparitor. The lamentation of Rachel after the fall of Jerusalem receives its eminent completion at the sight of the downfall of her people, ushered in by the slaughter of her children and the banishment of the Messias.
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07419a.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07419a.htm[/url][/quote]

[quote name='Mr.CatholicCat']The third is about us becoming apart of the Trinity, in of this question I started to ponder the “radical traditional” aspect because if they attended the traditional rite of mass this phrase should be alive and active in their heads.[/quote]
Yes, of course I'm familiar with the Last Gospel. It says that Catholics are the adopted sons of God.
And of course I believe everything contained in the Vatican Creed.
But the Catholic Church does not by any means teach that those who die in a state of grace after goign throught Purgatory if necessary become God and cease to exist. The Church teaches that in heaven have the beatific vision:

[quote][b]The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X:[/b]
4 Q. In what does the misery of the damned consist?
A. The misery of the damned consists in being for ever deprived of the vision of God and punished with eternal torments in hell.
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/CATECHSM/PIUSXCAT.HTM[/url][/quote]

Edited March 9, 2007 by StThomasMore

[Mr.Cat]

I have listened to your complaints and I do not feel they are founded. Moreover, there is no evidence that you have listed as my post requested that children are not able to obtain Baptism of Desire in one of its forms.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Mr.CatholicCat' post='1210793' date='Mar 9 2007, 12:02 AM']I have listened to your complaints and I do not feel they are founded. Moreover, there is no evidence that you have listed as my post requested that children are not able to obtain Baptism of Desire in one of its forms.[/quote]

Infants can recieve Baptism of Blood, though, now that I think about it the Holy Innocents could not have recieved BOB since the Sacrament of Baptism wasn't instituted until later.

Children cannot recieve Baptism of Desire since they cannot desire something until they have reached the age of reason.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1210667' date='Mar 8 2007, 11:08 PM']Most of the flow chart for the Catholic thoughts on salvation requires works.[/quote]In reality, all of it relies on the grace of God. Even in the "simple" Budgianity chart, one could read it and say that salvation depended on the believer, whose "work" is to say yes or no. Properly understood, Christians rightly ascribe every work, including their "yes" to the grace of God. You might like to read the section of the Catholic Catechism on Grace and Justification:

[url="http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt3art2.htm"]http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt3art2.htm[/url]

It may seem almost repetitive to read how often it is emphasized that grace is a free gift from Our Creator. Just as the Budgianity chart requires a single "yes" response, we Catholics realize that we have a lifetime to fall in love with Our Creator and respond "yes" to Him each day.

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1210667' date='Mar 8 2007, 11:08 PM']Do this, do that, and you get into heaven.[/quote]Our Lord Himself made the connection that, "If you love Me, you will keep My Commandments." (John 14:15) He didn't ask for lip-service. He let us know that everything we have and everything we are was a gift from Our Creator, and we are called to offer our lives back to Him.

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1210667' date='Mar 8 2007, 11:08 PM']Second, the purgatory. Heaven is timeless, so when you die, there is no time. You don't need any time to be purified once you die. You either enter heaven, or hell.[/quote]You are correct in a sense: purgatory is not outside of time; and a soul's final destination is either heaven or hell. The issue is: we know that nothing impure can enter heaven ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/revelation/revelation21.htm#v27"]Rev 21:27[/url]), yet what person would boast that they are 100% pure (i.e. no concupiscence, worldly attachments, etc)?

So, between dying and heaven, a purification must happen. Whether this purification takes a fraction of a second or a millenium is almost incidental, when seen relative to eternity. Since the Catholic Church hasn't made any statement about the duration of time spent for anyone in Purgatory (*), maybe we could at least content ourselves with an agreement that a soul must be without a single impurity before entering heaven. Fair enough?

(*) Note that there was/is a practice of associating particular indulgences with periods of time, but these times were not meant to be a measure of time in purgatory.
[quote name='FullTruth' post='1210667' date='Mar 8 2007, 11:08 PM']There seems so much to it, so complex.[/quote]The first thing that comes to mind when I read this is: a measure of simplicity or complexity has no bearing on determining Truth. A statement is either True or it is not.
[quote name='FullTruth' post='1210667' date='Mar 8 2007, 11:08 PM']The way God forgave the sins of Israel in the old testament was sacrifice first, the priest washing himself in the laver second, and going into the holy of the holiess third to sprinkle the blood on the Ark of the covenant.

The way God currently forgives sins now is repentance first (sacrifice/You starting the new birth experience), baptism second (the circumcision of the heart/You being born again of the water/washing of the priesthood), and infilling of the holy ghost third (the spirit filling the new tabernacle/temple/YOU being born again of the spirit!) Acts 2:38, which was Peter's, the first 'Pope' message to humanity.[/quote]This separation of being born-again and baptism is a novel teaching of the Reformation. In this case, the Catholic Truth happens to be simpler than the more complex Reformation theory. We are born again in the waters of Baptism.

I would agree with your tabernacle/temple metaphor, but I don't think that the "infilling of the Holy Ghost" (as you write it) is a third step in God's forgiveness of sins.

[quote name='FullTruth' post='1210667' date='Mar 8 2007, 11:08 PM']God's way has always been Sacrifice, washing and filling things with his spirit to bring blessings into the world.[/quote]Not sure exactly where this is going. Maybe something like, "God has always showered us with His Grace"?

[Mr.Cat]

Invisible Ignorance, traditional Catholic teaching. One does not have to implicitly know of their need to baptized to obtain Baptism of Desire.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1210799' date='Mar 9 2007, 02:07 AM']Infants can recieve Baptism of Blood, though, now that I think about it the Holy Innocents could not have recieved BOB since the Sacrament of Baptism wasn't instituted until later.

Children cannot recieve Baptism of Desire since they cannot desire something until they have reached the age of reason.[/quote]
Infants desire milk. Prenatal babies desire to live to such an extent that they flee the abortionist.

Of course, maybe by "desire" you mean "volition." However, the teaching says "if they would have desired Baptism had they known..." By saying, "had they known," it could be taken that it provides that not all will have the use of reason to know that Baptism is what they desired. I don't know, and I think the jury is out on whether BOD applies to babies, but I think there is room for disagreement on what is meant. Anyway, let the Church determine the matter. All I know is that my theology professor tells me that it has been declared that miscarried or aborted children to not go to hell. If the Church does away with the theory of limbo, then that only leaves one option. I'm banking on God's mercy.

[God Conquers]

Hey it's David's flowchart!

I know that guy!


Showing the two flowcharts against each other is disengeuous.

One is about DOCTRINE

The other SALVATION.

We could come up with a flow chart just as simple for salvation:

Person + Grace = Salvation.

There... make you guys happy?


Of course it's missing some finer points... JUST LIKE YOURS.