Sorry dude but TA's got a point here, Roman Catholics are the original Christians, and the church was founded by a Jew named Peter who's burial site is known there. There are lots of written accounts of this because there were lots of people who knew him and have recorded it, its in the Vatican library, and his teachings which where taught to him by Jesus are passed on in what they call oral tradition.
So the fact that Catholics say they have the true interpretation of scripture has the most validity, whereas the other tens of thousands of denominations follow a circular reasoning argument of "scripture alone" leading to countless of different interpretations and Christian sects, not what God had in mind I think...
Your other argument that "Our works cannot save us from God's judgement and wrath, but the Catholic church believes that it is so. Therefore, Catholics are not Christians and Catholics are more closely aligned with Islam because of their works-based theologies." is false as well.
James 2:24 "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." Catholics believe that righteousness does come from God and not by oneself, because of original sin, one cannot produce any righteous acts, therefore Christ, helps one become righteous but it needs active cooperation.
Your quote " individual works are as filthy rags" pertaining to Isaiah 64:6 in the bible was actually addressed to a particular historical situation, not to a general condition... The passage appeals to a time when Israelites once had a right relationship with God, when God helped them against their enemies, and remembered his ways, but when they turned against him and returned to their former ways he abandoned them leading to the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple...
I think you have good intentions MOS, but like so many protestants I believe you're somewhat ignorant of history.
Hey Sizwe,
I appreciate your comments, they are some of the most genuine I’ve read in this thread.
I did note that the Christian church was founded in and around Rome so no conflict there.
We can go back to July 19, 325AD at the council of Nicea in which Constantine (the Emperor of Rome) gathered together all the bishops of the church (including those of Rome which he conferred with the most) in order to discuss the concept of Arianism. It’s here that the council of bishops unified the theology and affirmed the Trinity of God, developed the Nicene Creed and rejected the concept of Arianism. All this developed and unified under the council of bishops of the early Christian church founded in and lead by the bishops of Rome primarily. The roots of the Christian church are undeniable and not in question. Although the true roots are founded in Jesus Christ and his apostles.
The Catholic church and the papacy of Catholic church (the pope in particular) claim to be extensions of Peter who Christ founded the church in as Christ said, “you are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church”…the most common appeal from Rome. But the rock is not Peter, the rock is Christ and Peter affirms this is in his own book (Peter 1). He acknowledges that Christ is the living cornerstone of the church that all is founded upon. In 1 Peter 2:8 he goes on to affirm that Christ is the rock….”he is the stone that makes people stumble, the rock that makes them fall.”
The whole of Christiainity was founded on a premise of oral tradition and this oral tradition was passed from jew to gentile. The early ministry of Christ’s apostles was established upon oral tradition. Hard to write stuff down when your spreading the good news and fighting for your life!
Keep in mind that the connection I made between Catholicism and Islam is based upon works-based theology only. I did not say Catholics are Muslims or Muslims are Catholics…..they are not. My intention was not offend Muslims or Catholics by claiming the two are interchangeable….they are not. They have independent theologies that both happen to be works based.
You are confusing salvation, justification and sanctification. The Catholic church often appeals to James 2:24 in these discussions, but the book of Romans clearly defines justification. The context of James 2:24 is everything and that context is that our our faith without our good works (through sanctification of the Holy Spirit) is dead….. justification is not salvation though. If you read my posts I refer to salvation by grace through faith. We are saved by grace through faith in Christ and nothing else…..nothing else. And what are we saved from? The judgement and wrath of God. Justification is the gift of grace in which the believer is freed from sin, but that freedom is based upon Christ’s act on the cross. James entire point was that our faith in Christ is meaningless is we don’t act upon it. Many claim to be Christians, but life the lives of devils…this is dead faith (or no faith). James even noted that even the demons believe in God. We must act upon faith (or work in our faith) to develop good fruits, but those works do not save us. Salvation comes before justification and salvation is only achieved via grace through faith in Christ. James’ book simply summarizes that if you claim Christ then live out your faith accordingly.
I will certainly concede the historical setting of Isaiah, but the validity of the verses is undeniable and its truth spans beyond the history of the moment and is absolutely relevant today. The Catholic appeal to historical context not transitioning forward is similar to Islam claiming the sword verse (Surah 9:5) is only historically relevant. Yet we witness radical Islam upholding the same standards today (allow me to note that this standard is not representative of the majority of Islam today though). Despite the punishment upon God’s people the additional verses in Isaiah provide more direction, “You welcome those who gladly do good, who follow godly ways. But you have been very angry with us, for we are not godly. We are constant sinners; how can people like us be saved? We are all infected and impure with sin. When we display our righteous deeds, they are nothing but filthy rags.”
You are correct that I still have a ton of history to learn…I’m no expert LOL.
