/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

2 Thessalonians 2:9-10, Matthew 24:23-26

There is recent one

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/eucharistic-miracle-confirmed-in-poland

>>598211

1 Corinthians 12:28 Galatians 3:5

https://ivarfjeld.com/2014/02/10/eucharistic-miracles-or-demonic-deceptions/

>>598326

>Liece if

Piece* of*

>>598233

So these miracles lend credence to the Shroud, which lends credence to the very real existence of Christ…how is this demonic?

From Matthew 12:

>24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

*Kvetching intensifies*

>>598326

That's a nice way of dodging the question.

>>598223

>Eucharistic miracles are a great testament of the Real Presence

>real presence

You should stop using that term and use Transubstantiation. Some protestants also believe in "the real presence" but they don't believe it is truly Christ's flesh and blood. It's an ambiguous term meant to blur the lines between Catholicism and protestantism.

>>598349

Don't worry about it. I was using that term up until a few days ago when I saw someone point out.

>>598328

One is the Son of God, the others are mortal men. Men who are very susceptible to demonic influence it seems.

>>598222

>1 Corinthians 12:28

Those miracles served to establish the gospel, not oppose it. Therefore these miracles which stand against scripture are sent by Antichrist.

>Galatians 3:5

This seems more properly cited against Eucharistic miracles since they are to confirm a religion which teaches to rely on works of the law and are therefore lying wonders sent to deceive any whoever they can.

>>598155

I'm inclined to believe it too OP. It's either true or a lie told by modern clergy which could be picked apart with more than "it's demonic! remember catlicks r bad!"

>>598233

>Testament to Christ's sacrifice on the cross

<oy vey it's demonic, goy!

incoherent and retarded

>>598233

>suffering a woman to teach ever

Thanks Sue.

>>598493

>Those miracles served to establish the gospel, not oppose it. Therefore these miracles which stand against scripture are sent by Antichrist.

> Scripture: consecrated bread and wine is the Body and Blood of Christ

>Miracle: consecrated bread and wine is the Body and Blood of Christ

100% compatibility

>This seems more properly cited against Eucharistic miracles since they are to confirm a religion which teaches to rely on works of the law and are therefore lying wonders sent to deceive any whoever they can.

CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.

>>598783

>> Scripture: consecrated bread and wine is the Body and Blood of Christ

That teaching is not to be found in scripture. In fact that false doctrine is the cause of manifold superstition and deception.

>CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.

CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

>>599036

I was thinking of pulling some bible quotes but then I realized that you wouldn't even consider the possibility that they even have the smallest chance of implying what the Catholic/Orthodox church implies, just like the last hundred times we had this argument.

>>599044

I won't "even consider the possibility" because I know what the bible teaches

>>599044

The Scriptures aren't your domain.

>>599036

>That teaching is not to be found in scripture.

<What is 1 Corinthians 10-11

<What is John 6

<What is Malachi 1:11

>In fact that false doctrine is the cause of manifold superstition and deception.

If it is "superstition and deception" it's like it since apostoles as prooved by letters of Ignatius and Didache.

>CANON IX

Faith alone being false=/=Works of the law being salvific m8

>>599411

>If it is "superstition and deception" it's like it since apostoles as prooved

Please hire an English teacher, then say that again, but this time coherent

>Faith alone being false=/=Works of the law being salvific m8

Wrong, see Romans 11:6

Also see canon 12 which denies that one is to rely solely on the merits of Christ and instead insists that one must rely also on works of the law in clear violation of Galatians 3:10-14

>>599424

On the contrary,

>Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law

But if you cannot love your neighbor, you cannot be one of Christ's, as we read

>7 Beloved, let us love one another; for love is of God, and he who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 He who does not love does not know God; for God is love.

Therefore there are three possibilities

1) Saint Paul contradicts himself

2) Saint John contradicts Saint Paul

3) There is a law that must be obeyed that is NOT the law that does not justify. And behold, scripture says

>“This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,”

It is therefore apparent a law exists which must be followed, and that law is necessary to justification, however this law is not the law which did not justify, which is called the mosaic law. Hence the apostle often makes distinction for the jews who would read him by calling the profitable law "the law of Christ" or often by what it contains, "good works" or "good deeds" however to remind the jews not to fall back he often calls the unprofitable law "the law" or "works of the law". I hope you consider that such a distinction exists and reread with that in mind.

>>599146

Cathodox were the ones who chose which books were in the Bible. If they were divinely inspired enough for that maybe you should listen to their teachings.

>>598326

>>Also Catholics: *Liece if bread literally turn into Jesus* Let's not eat it like were supposed and just keep it in a vase for hundreds of years.

Are you saying Catholics should have hidden the proof of the miracle instead of assuming God sent it so they can show it to everyone to evangelize?

>>599431

>Therefore there are three possibilities

>1) Saint Paul contradicts himself

>2) Saint John contradicts Saint Paul

>3) There is a law that must be obeyed that is NOT the law that does not justify.

The context of Paul, is this

<For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

This law is not another than that which said "Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them". I think rather in light of Paul, that there is no law which must be kept, but it is free to the believer, because they are a new creature in Christ Jesus. We learn from Romans 7:1 that a law only binds a person so long as they live. Since every Christian has died in Christ, receiving the punishment for their sins there, then therefore they cannot fall into judgement again. Indeed, this is what Paul himself tells us

<He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died

This is not to say we are not to keep the law, we are, and, if we are truly Christ's, we will, as John there says.

>It is therefore apparent a law exists which must be followed, and that law is necessary to justification, however this law is not the law which did not justify, which is called the mosaic law. Hence the apostle often makes distinction for the jews who would read him by calling the profitable law "the law of Christ" or often by what it contains, "good works" or "good deeds" however to remind the jews not to fall back he often calls the unprofitable law "the law" or "works of the law". I hope you consider that such a distinction exists and reread with that in mind.

You know, I have often found, that the argumentation a man makes offers the clearest window to his heart. He will not argue against what he himself holds. With this in mind, let us examine what Paul says, and see if your works of love are any different than their works of the law.

<I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for nothing.

The question is begged; what is it about circumcision that would make Christ's death vain? It is puzzling indeed if what you say is true, since it necessarily means circumcision is something so highly esteemed by God, something He craves so much, that love must be nothing in comparison. But when we understand that "the law" terminates on all human action whatsoever, it all becomes clear; if righteousness were by any human deed in any way, even assisted by tremendous grace along the way, then Jesus Christ did not need to die. They could have been saved that way instead. Let's see another

<What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due.

This is even clearer for two reasons. First, Paul drops the language of law and instead says simply works. The meaning is unequivocal, the pupose is plain. Secondly, Paul is speaking about Abraham. He is making an argument against them by the example of Abraham. When Abraham was alive, there was no mosaic law. Paul cannot simply be going after the mosaic law, because it hadn't been given yet, when he speaks of Abraham's works, which did not justify him, the law wasn't here yet.

Now, let's examine the text. Again, it presents the same problem. What is it about circumcision that is so tremendously valuable, that God would owe Abraham salvation if he were thereby justified? The answer, is of course, nothing. Again, Abraham would be owed salvation not because he was circumcised, but because he had done something. As Paul will go on to say in the passage, Abraham was right with God not because of things he'd done, but because of his faith alone.

>>599424

>Please hire an English teacher, then say that again, but this time coherent

Fine. Sense was: If Eucharist is "superstition and deception" this "superstition and deception" started in times of the apostles and was teached by people who apostles apointed to teach, as proved by historical sources

>Wrong, see Romans 11:6

It is not now by works: otherwise grace is no more grace. The election of God, and the first grace at least, are always without any merits on our part; but if we speak of works done in a state of grace, and by the assistance of God's grace, we co-operate with the graces given, and by thus co-operating, we deserve and merit a reward in heaven.

If salvation were to come by works, done by nature, without faith and grace, salvation would not be a grace or favour, but a debt; but such dead works are indeed of no value in the sight of God towards salvation. It is not the same with regard to works done with and by God's grace; for to such works as these he has promised eternal salvation.

Or again: CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.

>Also see canon 12 which denies that one is to rely solely on the merits of Christ and instead insists that one must rely also on works of the law in clear violation of Galatians 3:10-14

Are under a curse….cursed is every man, &c. The sense of these is to be found in Deuteronomy xxvii. 26. in the Septuagint. Some expound them thus: curses are pronounced against every one who keeps not all the precepts of the law, but there is not any one; i.e. scarce any one, who keepeth them all; therefore all under the law are under some curse. But as it cannot be said that no one kept all the precepts, especially the moral precepts of the law, mentioned in that place of Deuteronomy; (for Zacharias and Elizabeth were both just in the sight of God, Luke i., and doubtless many others lived so as not to incur those curses, but were just and were saved, though not by virtue of the works of the law only, nor without faith in God, and in their Redeemer, who was to come) therefore others understand that all such persons fall under these curses, who think to comply with all these precepts by their own strength, or who confide in the works of the law only, without faith in Christ, the Messias, and without which they cannot be saved. This agrees with what follows, that the just man liveth by faith. (Habacuc ii. 4.) See Romans i. 17. — Now the law is not of faith, i.e. the works done merely in compliance with the law, are not works of faith that can save a man: but he that doth those things of the law, shall live in them; i.e. says St. Jerome, shall have a long temporal life promised in the law; or, as others say, shall have life everlasting, if they are done with faith. — Christ hath redeemed us from these curses; but to do this, hath made himself a curse for our sake, by taking upon himself the similitude of a sinner, and by dying upon the cross, as if he had been guilty of the greatest sins, having only charged himself with our sins, inasmuch as it is written: (Deuteronomy xxi. 23.) cursed is every one who hangeth on a tree; which is to be understood, in case he deserve it for his own sins. — That the blessing of Abraham (or promised to Abraham) might be fulfilled; i.e. Christ redeemed us, that these blessings might be fulfilled on all nations, and that all might receive the promise of the Spirit, or the promised spirit of grace believing in Christ, who is now come.

Or Galatians 5:6

>>599600

>The election of God, and the first grace at least, are always without any merits on our part; but if we speak of works done in a state of grace, and by the assistance of God's grace, we co-operate with the graces given, and by thus co-operating, we deserve and merit a reward in heaven.

Right, and this is the very kind of thing which contradicts that verse since it says that grace must only be grace, mingled with a little bit of works at any point and it ceases to be grace.

>But as it cannot be said that no one kept all the precepts

Unbiblical, see Romans 3:9-20

>>599871

>Right, and this is the very kind of thing which contradicts that verse since it says that grace must only be grace, mingled with a little bit of works at any point and it ceases to be grace.

It's not.

O blessed of my father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.

What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not works? Shall faith be able to save him? And if a brother or sister be naked, and want daily food: And one of you say to them: Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself.

For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God has prepared that we should walk in them

>Unbiblical, see Romans 3:9-20

Biblical, see Romans 3:9-20

Ver. 9. What then do we Jews excel the Gentiles? He again turns his discourse against the Jews, by shewing that they have been sinners, as well as the Gentiles, notwithstanding the particular favours God had done to them, and not to the Gentiles: this he proves out of the psalms; and (ver. 19.) he shews, that these things were spoken of them, who were under the law.

Ver. 10. There is not any man just, viz. by virtue either of the law of nature, or of the law of Moses; but only by faith and grace.

The apostle here adduces a series of passages from the ancient Scripture, to convince both Jews and Gentiles, that not one amongst them was just, nor had any title to glory, on account of his good works. Not that a just man could not be found under the old law, or even before the law; an infinite number of passages of Scripture will shew the contrary: but he must be understood as speaking of man left to himself, as a son of Adam, conceived in sin, and brought forth a child of wrath.

The apostle here adduces a series of passages from the ancient Scripture, to convince both Jews and Gentiles, that not one amongst them was just, nor had any title to glory, on account of his good works. Not that a just man could not be found under the old law, or even before the law; an infinite number of passages of Scripture will shew the contrary: but he must be understood as speaking of man left to himself, as a son of Adam, conceived in sin, and brought forth a child of wrath.

Ver. 17. St. Augustine says, that by the law of actions, is understood, that which teaches us what we have to do: by the law of faith, is meant faith itself, which obtains for us grace of performing what the law requires. The law of actions, then, is the old law, which contains the precept; the law of faith is the new law, which gives assistance to fulfil the law. (De Spir. & Lit. chap. iv.)

>>599925

Ver. 19. And all the world may be made subject to God. That is, God permitted these sins in all men, that sanctification and salvation might be from Christ only, the Redeemer of all men, so that neither Jew nor Gentile should be justified, but by the free and liberal gift of his grace. See St. Chrysostom.

That the Jews might not say that these passages were to be understood of Gentiles, the apostle here assures them that they must be understood in the first place of the Jews themselves; for what the law speaketh, it speaketh to those who are under the law. If the Jews, then, were so guilty, the guilt of the Gentiles was far more enormous. Thus is every mouth stopped, and all the world must confess itself guilty before God. Let none then glory in their good works.

Ver. 20. &c. To the end of this chapter, the apostle shews that the Jews cannot be truly justified, and sanctified by the works of the written law of Moses only; that a knowledge of sin, or of what is sinful, came by the law, but if they did not comply with the precepts of the law, this knowledge made them more guilty. Now, at the coming of Christ, the justice of God, that is, the justice by which he made others just, and justified them, cannot be had without faith in Christ, and by the grace of our Redeemer Jesus Christ, whom God hath proposed to all, both Gentiles and Jews, as a sacrifice of propitiation for the sins of all mankind, by faith in his blood; that is, by believing in him, who shed his blood and died for us on the cross. It is he alone, (ver. 26.) that is the just one, and the justifier of all. And as to this, there is no distinction. The Gentiles are justified and sanctified without the written law, and the Jews who have been under the law, cannot partake of the justice of God, that is, cannot be justified, sanctified, or saved, but by the faith and grace of Christ Jesus.

St. Paul does not pretend that the virtue of faith alone will justify and save a man; nothing can be more opposite to the doctrine of the gospel, and of the apostles in many places, as hath been observed, and will be shewn hereafter. He tells us in this chapter (ver. 20. and 28.) that man is justified without the works of the written law: and he teaches us, that no works of the law of Moses, nor any works that a man does by the law of nature, are sufficient to justify a man, and save him of themselves, that is, unless they be joined with faith, and the grace of God. And when he seems to say, that men are justified or saved by faith, or by believing, as he says of Abraham in the next chapter, (ver. 3. and 5.) he never says (as some both ancient and later heretics have pretended) that faith alone is sufficient. And besides by faith, he understands the Christian faith and doctrine of Christ, as opposite to the law of Moses, to circumcision, and the ceremonies of that law, as it evidently appears by the design of the apostle, both in this epistle and in that to the Galatians. He teaches us in this epistle (chap. ii. 6.) that God will judge every man according to his works: (chap. ii. 13.) that "not the hearers of the law," but the doers, shall be justified. See also chap. vi. He tells the Galatians (chap. v. ver. 6.) that the faith, by which they must be saved, must be a faith working by charity. He also tells the Corinthians (1 Corinthians vii. 19.) that circumcision is nothing, nor uncircumcision, but the keeping of the commandments of God. That though a man should have a faith, that so he could remove mountains, it would avail him nothing without charity. How often does he tell us that they who commit such and such sins, shall not inherit or possess the kingdom of God? Does not St. James tell us, that faith without good works is dead? See chap. ii.