>become protestant
>scared to death I’ll die get judged by Catholic Jesus
or
>become Catholic
>be scared to death I’ll die and get judged by Protestant Jesus
or
>become what have you
>be scared to death I’ll die and get judged by Amish Jesus
and so on
And that’s the #1 reason I suspend judgement denominationally and have been doing so for like 27 years.
Pull trigger.
But if I do, I’ll never be happy in that denomination, always worried about “what if I’m wrong?”
>And that’s the #1 reason I suspend judgement denominationally and have been doing so for like 27 years.
That's basically a Protestant position. According to Catholics and Orthodox they are the one true church respectively, but Protestants tend to believe that the true church means true believers collectively. The Anglican church(es) allow a range of theological positions, so they might be a fit for you.
> According to Catholics and Orthodox they are the one true church respectively, but Protestants tend to believe that the true church means true believers collectively
The Catholic Church officially acknowledges the possibility of grace in Protestant and Orthodox churches.
All three are pretty consistent though on what you should do. The differences are pretty minor as Jesus doesn't have a domination.
Roman Catholicism has a false gospel, a self-righteous works-based gospel, that denies the sufficiency of the blood atonement of Christ and they boast in themselves. And this isn't even getting into their traditions which violate God's laws or contradict Scripture like all the idolatry or Mary as a co-redeemer.
Ephesians 2:8-9
>For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Jesus made the authority of Scripture clear by constantly quoting from it and declaring "it is written" (e.g. how he rebuked Satan), and the Bible says God has magnified His Word above all his name in Psalms 138:2.
Also make sure you have a real Bible that came out of Antioch where the term "Christian" originated; and not one of the many translations of the fake bible that came from the gnostics and occultists out of Alexandria, Egypt or the Codex Vaticanus forgery.
If you read the Gospels themselves, Jesus is commonly making metaphors about how the evil people will be the ones going to hell. Trees who don't produce good fruit will get cut down so no matter what the denomination works are necessary.
>Whatsoever is not of faith is sin-Romans 14:23
Works will not save you.
Revelation 20:12
12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.
This verse doesn't negate the need for works. It says that refusing to have faith in Jesus is a sin.
There is no moral worth in man, on account of which God could pronounce him just. But the stream cannot rise higher than its source: the activity of his faculties and the products of this activity cannot transcend in moral value the fountain whence they flow. What is not in man cannot emanate from him. The heart is sinful, and that which issues from it is sin. Mat. 15:19,20 and Galatians 5:19-21 also fully certifies us that the exercise of the moral powers which man possesses by nature result in sin, and that those who have nothing beyond this to rely upon are yet in their sins and cannot be justified. Moreover if good works of the natural man even were real virtues, they would form no ground for justification. Man’s good works are never free from the impurities of the flesh, which he bears with him, and which affects him and all that he does in this mortal life. And even supposing that they were free from every taint of sin, the acts which are performed in accordance with the law’s requirements cannot make amends for the deeds by which that law was transgressed. Luke 17:10 shows the performance of duty in the present will not atone for its neglect in the past, and can therefore constitute no claim of justification. But these performances are not real virtues in the sight of God, strong as their external resemblance to virtue may be, and illusion as they on that account frequently are. For God looks at the heart, and by it judges the work. If the heart which produces it be evil, the product cannot be pronounced good. “Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?” (Rom. 14:23), and God will not declare it virtue. Man may exert himself as he will, he is a child of wrath by nature (eph. 2:3), and without Christ must remain such. To suppose that, with such a nature, his efforts or accomplishments will entitle him to justification is sheer superstition.
Justification is God transforming the sinner into a completely new person. Justification isn't God covering up the sins.
Yes justification is a divine declaration changing the sinner’s relation to God. The grounds of justification is not of man’s natural worthiness or human acquirement but the grace of God and the merits of Christ. And the means of its reception is only faith.
> Yes justification is a divine declaration changing the sinner’s relation to God
But that’s not what Anon said. Anon said justification~sanctification, as opposed to a legal pardoning alone.
You’re conflating participating in the sacramental life of the church with “the good works of natural man”, which is entirely is not.
>God looks at the heart
The sacraments change someone’s heart.
How am I? All I said was the grounds of justification is not any human acquirement.
> How am I?
Because you speak about Catholic justification as if it were based on the merit and good works of natural man as opposed to sanctification through encountering Christ in the sacraments.
K
>justification as if it were based on the merit and good works of natural man
>the grounds of justification is not any human acquirement.
>Man’s good works are never free from the impurities of the flesh, which he bears with him, and which affects him and all that he does in this mortal life.
>Man may exert himself as he will, he is a child of wrath by nature (eph. 2:3), and without Christ must remain such. To suppose that, with such a nature, his efforts or accomplishments will entitle him to justification is sheer superstition.
You have poor reading comprehension. Or you’re just proving this anon right
You speak about CATHOLIC justification as if it were based on the merit and good works of natural man.
Reading The council of Trent and Bellarmine make that very clear.
I’ve read Trent. Gonna need some Catholic quotes that justification is based on the merit and good works of natural man.
Canon 12
>If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence and divine mercy which remits sins for Christ sake, that it is confidence alone that justifies us let him be anathema.
Canon 14
>If anyone says that man is absolved from his sins and justified because he firmly believes that he is absolved and justified or that no one is truly justified except him who believes himself justified And by this faith alone absolution and justification are affected. Let him be anathema.
If you believe you are justified and believe your sins are forgiven because you trust in Christ, and that affects justification and absolution you are anathema. Clear rejection of faith alone.
Canon 24
>If anyone says that justice is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works but that those works are fruits and signs of justification obtained not a cause of its increase. Let him be anathema.
This is an affirmation that good works do play a role in justification. They increase our justification. Our righteousness can be increased by good works. They are actively affecting our salvation. This is a Clear distinction.
Yes, Trent roundly rebukes sola fide. It doesn’t state that justification is based on the merit or good works of natural man.
It’s incredible that you acted this smug and self-righteous as if you were some sort of crusader only to finally post a source that doesn’t say what you claimed it did.
Anti-Catholics are one of the lowest IQ groups.
Sure buddy. I guess I just won’t believe my lying eyes when I read Trent, Bellarmine, and Protestants interacting with Bellarmine.
Have you read the CCC?
Yes.
Then you’re plainly moronic or are outright lying because what you claim they say isn’t what they as evidenced by what you posting not being what you said it was.
Don't expect him to be honest, buddy. He's already proven he's a liar who won't argue in good faith.
Name the lie
You're promoting the pagan cult of popery and claiming it's Christianity, everything you've posted is working towards a lie. You've never posted in good faith either, you ask what you ignore while you ignore an entire post. You're a lying sack of shit.
Your 7th Day Adventist sh*t doesn’t matter, the entire argument revolves getting you to justify your claims
which you haven’t done.
It's not from SDA, it's from Scripture and your cult used to murder people who'd keep God's commandment over your sun worship tradition. You clearly know nothing about history either. You have no light in you, papist trash.
You have provided zero (0) evidence for your claim that sacramental Christianity is a “self-righteous works-based gospel”.
Because "sacramental Christianity is a “self-righteous works-based gospel”." is never what I said, you disingenuous lying sack of shit.
>ignoring everything in the post
>demanding jump through hoops
You're so disingenuous.
I guess that's expected of someone who worships a pedophile cult.
Oh, and I don't have to prove papists are boastful or self-righteous, they prove it themselves. You just have that cult's blinders on so you refuse to see the corrupt fruit of your own cult members.
Their works-based gospel is clear for all to see also, they openly proclaim it, so I don't know what you're even whining about you moronic loser. Just some papist idolater getting triggered like an SJW snowflake over being called boastful and self-righteous, which is the fruit of every works-based religion.
Papism is proto-SJWism, you losers would murder people for saying *words* your pope didn't like.
> Their works-based gospel is clear for all to see also, they openly proclaim it
Proof?
?
If “they openly proclaim it” it should be easy to produce proof.
How about every single discussion on salvation and works? Your deliberate ignorance is not an argument, you moronic pedophile apologist.
This is papist logic, that saving faith makes pedophiles. No wonder their cult always covers up for crimes against children and their moronic cult followers refuse to leave their cult for it.
If you hate works so much you foam at the mouth then it produces all kinds of bad things.
So your argument is to reference “every single discussion”? Are you not going to produce anything substantive?
>you have to do these rituals if you want to earn heaven
>say the hail mary 20 times to absolve your sin
Thanks for proving papists are as dishonest as atheists.
How is that earning heaven? Faith without works is dead, simple as that.
The works of your cult is mass torture and murder, so it obviously has a dead faith, simple as that.
If "sola fide is true" then you can be a pedo all you want and go to heaven so ironically you're supporting the people you hate
OWNED
Good works infallibly result from faith though, teehee
Saving faith produces works, works don't produce salvation. You can't earn God's gift, you can't earn his mercy, you can't bribe the judge.
Christians don't obey God or love God supremely or love their neighbors as themselves to be saved, they do it because they are saved by God's grace through faith. It's not something we could ever earn. God's so holy that the punishment for any and all sin is death, and only faith in the blood atonement of Jesus Christ can save by God's grace. If God had no grace or mercy, then we'd all get justice, we'd all get what we deserve.
Ezekiel 18:4 ... the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. ...
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
If you're earning it by works, then it's not a gift. If you're earning salvation rather than salvation being from God, you're being glorified rather than God. There are rewards mentioned by Christ, but that's apart from salvation. And a faith that doesn't produce works is a false faith (or a dead faith), typically rooted in a false gospel or false theology, such as modern Calvinism which often produces arrogant and bitter people who lack the love of the God in them.
>> self-righteous works-based gospel
>Proof?
Are you Catholic? What do they tell you if you don't perform all their rituals? or if you miss one communion? or if you're not baptized or if you don't do this or that? By Catholic doctrine, the thief on the cross wasn't saved. Even baptists will tell you that baptism isn't what saves you since it's a work. False religions have works-based salvation, it's something you have to do or earn, and works-based salvation makes people self-righteous over their deeds like the Pharisees who thanked God they weren't like other men such as the tax collector. According to the Scripture, it's faith that saves (but then this faith produces works as I said above).
>What do they tell you if you don't perform all their rituals?
That you’re refusing to encounter Christ sacramentally.
> or if you miss one communion
That’s a sin, same as theft. Would you say the same thing about other sins (“What do they tell you if you murder someone”)?
> or if you're not baptized
Same as what every other Christian says, also the Bible?
> False religions have works-based salvation, it's something you have to do or earn
Is the act of having faith not something you “do”?
> makes people self-righteous over their deeds like the Pharisees who thanked God they weren't like other men such as the tax collector
You keep assuming this, but do you have evidence that it actually occurs? Also, what prevents a “sola fide” adherent from falling into pride just the same?
> but then this faith produces works as I said above
Oh really! And are these works something that “you have to do”?
>That you’re refusing to encounter Christ sacramentally.
That cookie and grape juice is not Jesus Christ.
>> or if you miss one communion
>That’s a sin
Sin is transgressing the laws of God, not missing communion.
1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
But they have to tell you lies like that to keep you coming back, keep you living in fear of "purgatory" (a lie), and keep you without assurance of salvation. If the Romanist cult taught that Biblical doctrine, there'd be no need for their extremely-wealthy cult with its influence and reach throughout the world.
>Is the act of having faith not something you “do”?
The classic "faith is a work, therefore salvation is by works" malarkey. You clearly have no intention of arguing in good faith or maybe you're just so deluded from all that brainwashing and indoctrination. Rather than having a love of the truth, you have a love for your belief system and religious system.
You also didn't post a single line of Scripture or reference any of it either to support your arguments. I posted plain scripture and you're arguing against it; but you Papists can't even interpret scripture, your cult tells you only their clergy's private interpretation is correct (against what Scripture says) and they tell you only they can tell you what it akshually means.
Go worship your idols of your "co-redeemer" Mary. Maybe it'll cut off a few thousands years from the lie of purgatory or maybe you can buy some indulgences. The blind leading the blind.
>That cookie and grape juice is not Jesus Christ.
I can understand why Catholics might think they need their religious system.
They're always shown Jesus dead or as a helpless baby or as a piece of food, none of which can do anything for them. But the Scripture is clear that Jesus isn't still on the cross, but that he is risen and at the right hand of the throne of God and he will return in fury to take vengeance on those who know not God and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
> That cookie and grape juice is not Jesus Christ
You’re entitled to believe that, you’re not entitled to believe that sacrementality=boasting works-based self-righteousness, because it doesn’t follow.
> Sin is transgressing the laws of God, not missing communion
Assuming sacraments are real, why wouldn’t refusing to participate on the Lord’s day be a violation of the New Covenant?
> The classic "faith is a work, therefore salvation is by works" malarkey
Do you have a response?
> You also didn't post a single line of Scripture or reference any of it either to support your arguments
John 6:53-56; Matthew 28:19; Exodus 20:8-11
It's weird how triggered you got by "boasting" and "self-righteous" but you won't deny it has a works based false gospel. I guess you don't have a lot of exposure in talking to Catholics or you're blinded by all that kool-aid you've been drinking.
>on the Lord’s day
The Lord's day is the sabbath (seventh day, Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:8-11, rather than the first day of "sunday" or the "venerable day of the sun" from your Baal-worship pagan cult).
>Isaiah 58:13 If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words:
"my holy day"
>Matthew 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
>Mark 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
>Luke 6:5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Jesus is Lord of the sabbath.
>Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
No light in the Papist cult or its followers since they don't speak according to the law, but instead use their own law and they claim the Lord's day is the first day rather than the seventh day.
>Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Law not destroyed.
>Do you have a response?
You've been ignoring most of what I've posted and you're offended I don't answer your disingenuous question? You can't even address what I said, you just reply with "waah you didn't jump through my hoops". You're a loser and I'm sure you'll ignore everything I posted this time too just like you still refused to address my earlier points.
Your cult used to torture and murder people like me, people who would even just own a Bible or who would keep God's commandments over your popish edicts.
What did you say that I didn’t address? All I’m wondering is your reasoning for why the sacraments would entail a self-righteous works-based gospel, or any argument for why sola fide leads to any less structural boasting.
You're so disingenuous.
*asks your basic reasoning*
>y-you’re disingenuous!
K
Thanks for continuing to prove my point that you're disingenuous.
If the law is not destroyed eating pork is a sin and animal sacrifice is still necessary
The law is not “destroyed” btw, it is sacred and holy, it is just fulfilled and re-deployed under the New Covenant
The parable of the unjust steward says to use the money God gives you wisely to help others out so they can testify for you on the day of judgement.
>By Catholic doctrine, the thief on the cross wasn't saved
He’s literally a canonized saint in the Catholic Church.
> self-righteous works-based gospel
Proof?
> they boast in themselves
Proof?
>For by grace are ye saved through faith
For me having faith drives me to do good, not just be enlightened inside of my own head, because I don't think that is possible. It eliminates an entire dimension that absolutely shapes your soul, just as you shape the world.
Why is Christianity (I guess all Abrahamic religions) such a splintered mess? Why do you need to be specific and about the type of foreskin cheese jesus had? I go to a temple and pray to the ruler of the heavens, if I pass by another temple, usually hindu because there are some hindus, I give a slight prayer to them too (especially hanuman, reminds me of sun wukong and I was also born in the year of the monkey. I love monkeys)
Study which one makes more sense or not, choose in term of probabilities and pray for God to do the correct choice. There's no other way.
Bow down every day and say: "Blessed be the Real Most High God" and then praise him for all the wonderful things he created in the world and thank him for all the things you love.
When you pray say: Dear Real Most High God.... and then ask him for help and guidance.
If you address the Real God then the Real God is the one who will hear you, even if you do not know his name or who he is. There is only one Real God, the one who is the Most High.
If not, try addressing him with titles that can only belong to him, like "Dear Creator of Heaven and Earth." Or "Dear Sovereign Ruler of the World." Or "Dear Eternal God." Or "Dear Holy One." Or "Dear Almighty God." Or "Dear God of Abraham" He is the one who will hear you and he does answer when you address him and worship him alone.
>Become christian
>Constantly pissing pants about made up israeli nonsense
Many such cases
If you're scared of judgement you haven't met Jesus
Is that how denominations work, do Greek Orthodox and Methodists see each other as heretics? It seems like there are some strains that are often called heresies, ie. Mormons, Unitarians, the prosperity gospel, Jehovah's Witnesses, but that wouldn't carry any weight if you could be equally damned for having a subtly different Mass tradition.
Mass isn't biblical, it's literally not Christianity according to the Scriptures.
>Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf. 18 Consider the people of Israel: Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar?
You reject and add to the sacrifice of Christ. And don't move goalposts from your Mass to biblical communion, papist idolater.
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
1 Corinthians 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
>quoting Corinthians
1 Corinthians 10:7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.
Catholic and Orthodox churches recognize any trinitarian baptism (you have to be chrismated/confirmed still). Protestants are not seen as heretics on the same level by apostolic Christians (Catholic & Orthodox). And Methodists definitely aren’t calling apostolic Christians heretics—that would be absurd.
>be non-denominational
>be scared to death I'll die and get judged by denominational Jesus
test
>I live in permanent, crippling fear of my god's wrath
you might just be worshipping a demon
>get judged by Protestant Jesus
No such thing
Kind of sounds like you don't actually believe anything and are just scared of getting hurt. I don't blame you this is after all the whole basis of Christianity.
If only there was some unchanging ancient textual basis from which you could resolve this issue