/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

And how do you get to Christ retard?

By just saying I love you Jesus? Lol.

>>749949

>That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. [Romans 10:9]

>>749932

How about you explain sola scriptura after reading THIS verse?

Genesis 2:24 "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

>>749967

They morph together, it's a lost thing to the ancient world, thank adam and eve for that one

>>749962

Belief implies obeying the laws Christ set too. As Christ said, if you commit certain sins, you won't be saved. Christ also said the path to salvation is narrow. To think that belief without any action that proves that belief is enough for salvation is very bold, I wouldn't dare to be so presumptuous.

>>749962

And? How do you get to fully believe with your heart in Jesus?

With the sacraments of course specially with the Holy Eucharisty where Christ is fully present there.

from a theoretical point of view only baptism is absolutely needed for salvation, since that's the one that shows you really are in Christ.

>>749962

And of course this >>749974.

>>749943

In which verse did Christ institute sacraments?

>>749977

Remaining an heretic until the end of the life keeps you from salvation.

>>749980

Sorry for my poor English, that’s the sin I actually meant. So besides that then what else

First you need to explain what you mean by sacrament.

>>749977

What, according to you, is the purpose of the 10 commandments? Are they not for Christians? But, if Christians are saved by the very fact they're Christians, they don't need those commandments, do they, because they get saved anyway?

>>749979

https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/sacraments_in_scripture.htm

>>749949

By truly believing in Him. Why call me the retard; I’m only quoting what our God said.

>>749984

Aren’t certain sacraments things you can buy to supposedly achieve salvation? I had heard that sacraments leading to salvation was a thing a long ago in the Catholic Church.

From my catechisms…

>Those who commune to the Body and Blood of the Resurrected One can perceive what St. Paul calls, in his epistle to the Colossians, the Mystery of Chist (4:3): "The mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints." (1:26)

>Let us try, not to "comprehend" this mystery -because it is infinitely greater and deeper than human intelligence, which can only "comprehend", meaning contain, that which is smalle than itself - but to contemplate it with awe, just as Paul when he encountered it on the road of Damascus.

>1. Christ, the son of Mary, is a man like us: all that which is in Him can be communicated to other men: this is why He can save us.

>2. This same Christ, Only Son of God, is God, the same and unique God as His Father and His Holy Spirit. This is why He can unite us to the Father.

>3. By having communion to the Body and Blood of Chrrist, we are joined with his Resurrected Body, we become one body with Him and we participate to His divinity. This mysterious Body constituting of the union of the Head (Christ) with the limbs (the communicants) is called the Church.

>4. The head of a body acts by putting into movement its limbs. Likewise, Christ acts in the world by urging His faithful, the members of His Church. Christ is present in the world and acts in it through His Church. The members of the latter respond to the calls of the Head by listening to his Word.

>5. The limb of a body is only a living limb if the blood pumped by the heart passes through this limb. The members of the Churrch are living limbs only if the Holy Spirit circulates through them, unitin them together and uniting them to the Head.

>6. This mysterious fact that men, who are sinful but believers, are united to the Body of the resurrected Christ by the work of the Holy Spirit, becoming limbs of a single Body which is Christ, and carrying on today in the world the work of Christ so that He speaks and acts through them, is called the mystery of the Church.

>7. This mystery of Christ or mystery of the Church has several aspects that St. Paul calls (1 Corinthians 4:1) "mysteries of Christ", that Orthodox Christians commonly call "mysteries" for short, that the Latin language has called sacramenta, from which we get the usual English term of sacraments.

…

>>749994

<Q: How can we parrticipate to the death of Christ?

>A: We participate to the suffering of the Son of God:

>- by sincere faith;

>- by the holy Sacraments which hide and contain the force of the suffering and death of Jesus Christ (Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 11:26);

>- by the crucifixion of the flesh with its desires and passions (Galatians 2:24). St. Paul the Apostle said: "I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me." (Galatians 2:20)

<Q: What is the Sacrament?

>A: The Sacrament (from the Greek μυστήριον [mysterion]) is a sacred act during which God acts upon man with His invisible grace through the intermediary of visible matter.

<Q: How many Sacraments or Mysteries are there?

>A: In a greater sense, there is an unilimited number of divine Mysteries, because God acts as He wishes and no one can limit His actions. In an ecclesiastical sense, there are seven. 1) Baptism; 2) Chrismation; 3) Eucharist; 4) Confession; 5) Ordination; 6) Marriage; 7) Unction of the sick.

<Q: By the intermediary of what matter does God act in the Sacraments?

>A: In Baptism, God acts through water. In Chrismation and Unction of the sick, He acts through oil. In the Eucharist, He acts through the bread and wine which become the true Body and the true Blood of Christ. In Ordination, God acts through the laying on of hands of the bishops. In Confession, God acts through the intermediary of the priest to whom the Church has given the right to forgive sins.

<Q: What does each Sacrament do?

>A: 1) In Baptism, man is born again for spiritual life and becomes a member of the Body of Christ. 2) In Chrismation, man receives the grace of the Holy Spirit, the strength necessary for spiritual life. 3) In the Eucharist, man eats spiritual Food to receive eternal life. 4) In Confession, man is healed of spiritual diseases and obtains the remission of sins. 5) In Ordination, man receives the grace needed to raise up and educate others toward salvation by teaching them and administering them the Sacraments. 6) In Marriage, the husband and wife receive the grace to sanctify their union, and the blessing for the birth and education of children. 7) In Unction, those who are sick heal from bodily diseases.

<Q: Who accomplishes the Sacraments?

>A: God Himself accomplishes truly, and not symbolically, all the Sacraments through the ministry of the bishops and priests. St. Ambrose of Milan said that "the one who baptizes is not Damasus, Peter, Ambrose or Gregory. We fulfill our task as servants, but the effectiveness of the sacrament depends on You. It is not in the power of man to transmit divine gifts, they are given by You, Lord."

>>749991

Bro, I'm not even sure you know what sacraments actually are. And sacraments aren't something that Rome invented, they have always existed in every Apostolic Church ie the Churches founded by the Apostles (st. Mark-Alexandria (modern day Copts), st.James-Jerusalem, st.Peter and Paul - Antioch (the Syrian Orthodox) and Rome).

And see also article 15 of the confession of Dositheus to see that the sacraments are all of apostolic origins.

http://www.crivoice.org/creeddositheus.html

>>749932

/christian/ was a mistake. separate denominations should all have their own boards

>>749979

>Baptism:

Matthew 28:19

Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

>Eucharisty

Matthew 26:26-28

And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his disciples and said: Take ye and eat. This is my body. And taking the chalice, he gave thanks and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.

Also John 6 where He explains it.

>Confession/Penance

John 20:23

Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

>Confirmation

Acts 2:3-4

And there appeared to them separate tongues, as if of fire, which settled upon each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit. And they began to speak in various languages, just as the Holy Spirit bestowed eloquence to them.

Acts 19:6

And when Paul had imposed his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon them: and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.

>Matrimony (already existed. Christ sanctified it)

Mark 10:6-9

But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause, a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife. And they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.

>Holy Orders

Acts 6:5-6

And the saying was liked by all the multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip and Prochorus and Nicanor, and Timon and Parmenas and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch. These they set before the apostles: and they praying, imposed hands upon them.

>Last Rites

James 5:13-15

Is any of you sad? Let him pray: Is he cheerful in mind? Let him sing. Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the church and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man. And the Lord shall raise him up: and if he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him.

>>749991

No, sacraments and Liturgy are like taking your medicine.

In Orthodoxy we have a very different view of salvation, even the denotation is much less used. Theosis is the basis of our Soteriology.

If you're starting from the protestant assumption of salvation, sacraments are retarded. I'd agree.

Though I think that assumption is flawed because nothing can justify us before God, no act and no faith. Only through God's Energy/Grace.

>>749975

>Baptism shows you are in Christ

>It is absolutely needed for salvation

By your own statement you are in Christ before baptism. Are you saying salvation is distinct from being in Christ?

>>750021

Then why did Jesus ordered us to be born again from water to be saved.

This anon is correct >>750003 you guys have a completely new way of thinking about salvation different in every way from Christians.

>>750024

Because the new birth doesn't come by baptism, the baptism only depicts the spiritual rebirth

>>750037

John 3:5

Jesus answered: Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

>pff its just another metaphor.

>>750040

don't you know that the whole bible is just metaphors? jesus was more of a guru tbh

>>750045

>everything is a work

Protestant meme word.

>>750045

That's actually pretty convincing to me, I'd like to see a rebuttal.

>>750045

Question… do you think taking part in the Sacrements would be considered "works"?

>>750048

Yeah, my NT 1 prof explained it to me and it all made so much sense now

>>750051

Yes, that's why we Baptists call them ordinances to clarify that they have no part in the salvation process

A work is any act

>>750052

Yeah that's wrong. They aren't works.

>>750054

Great assertion buddy

>>750055

I'm just saying, Catholics don't view it as works. You are wrong.

We take part in the Sacrements as they are dispensations of grace, Christ is the one who ordains the Sacrements.

>>750045

>ignore entire bible because 1 verse says you won't be judged

autism

>>750000

Your quad zeros (checked) are representative only of the emptiness of your post. This place is amazing. There is nothing like it in the world.

We are all wrong. Let's listen to each other to try and glean what small truth might be present in each of our traditions.

>>750063

Uh, for what act are we doing? We do nothing but recieve.

You just said any "act", it's literally not an act.

Act of Giving, makes sense.

Act of receiving, does not make sense.

>>750064

no, this place is just retards yelling at eachother and preaching heresies.

>>750065

What does the Lord's supper look like at your church?

>>750067

I recieve bread and wine.

Do you perform acts to receive Grace? No! That's non-sense we both know this!

But, we recieve grace for partaking in the holy elements! Because they are not acts, they are vehicles of grace, where by Jesus Christ administrates.

what do you do when you receive them?

>>750071

>>750068

>>750055

Because baptist are the ones to tell catholics what they believe lmao.

>>750045

Acts 2:38

But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Why did Peter told people to be baptised if a man profits nothing from it in your opinion?

Besides if baptism cleans your sins as Peter says how can you claim its merely physical? Sin is a condition of the soul.

Those who are born from the flesh are flesh, but those who are born form the high, the ones who are born of the Spirit are spirit and that's what baptism does. Makes you born from the high.

St. John the baptist clearly says that Jesus is gonna baptise us in the Holy Spirit. Why did he say it? Don't we just feed to say I believe you Jesus? Why being baptised?

Another thing why would the apostles bother too baptise anyone if it wasn't needed, if it was just a work?

Either baptism is required for salvation or the apostles were heretics. Pick one.

>MUH John 3:16

And you think you really believe in Jesus when you say you don't need to do the things he told us to do jsut because you have a Bible written and compiled by the apostles and their successors?

Top kek.

>>750063

>Catholics can't explain their own beliefs because that's appeal to authority

Wait a minute what

>>750074

They are right. He admitted that explaining the Catholic doctrine is appealing to the Authority of Jesus Christ, not of our limited mind.

>>750072

I eat, and I drink, of his body that he has given to me. So that by his blood my sin is cleaned, and by his body I am raised into life.

Is prayer, a work?

>>750073

Be repent and be baptised because you have remission of sins

Baptism remains an urgent instruction to follow, and I highly doubt the unbaptized are saved since they're not willing to follow the first step of christianity

>>750074

>>750078

Read:

>without any other supporting evidence offered

>>750079

Are eating and drinking actions?

>>750082

So what's your point? I don't get it.

>>750082

Repent and be baptised*

Like, "take two asprins for your headache"

>>750082

Acts=/=Actions

Answer me as I have answered you, are Prayers works?

>>750087

they are but it doesn't count because they think it actually does something instead of being a symbolic act. so yeah, they will burn in hell

>>750082

>without any other supporting evidence offered

What do you mean by this? Do you need evidence that repenting is not works salvation?

>and I highly doubt the unbaptized are saved since they're not willing to follow the first step of christianity

Imagine doing this many logical circles to hate Catholicism then basically agreeing with Catholicism anyways.

And before you ask the Catholic church states you can be saved even if you want to be baptized but you die for some reason before going to church.

>>750088

You think Baptism doesn't actually do something?

YOU THINK BAPTISM IS SYMBOLIC?

>>750084

Which point?

>>750086

Actions are acts

Prayers are acts

The Lord's supper is an act, as in you "do" it

<Do this in remembrance of me

This is the meaning of works (ergon) in the Bible

>>750087

Most of them, yes, but that's not the point I was making

I was referring to Protestants evangelicals who don't follow through with baptism after giving a sinners prayer

>>750091

nothing does anything because john 3:16, papist

>>750094

Ohh man. If you're contending Prayer is a work then I think I'm done here.

>>750095

Do you really think you have the Son in you by disagreeing with his direct orders? Holy cow what kind of autism is this?

>unironically saying papist

Not an argument.

>>750089

It is a fallacy to just assert that I'm wrong because Catholicism says so. That's all I was saying. I'm not trying to tell Catholics what they believe.

>>750089

Do not ever mistake me for agreeing with Catholicism. Catholics practice pedobaptism by sprinkling.

>>750098

You're arguing with a sarcastic Catholic you goober

>>750100

>because Catholicism says so

Thats… thats not how it works, we are Catholic because we are united in the same doctrinal Faith. We don't base our Faith off what we are told.

Literally not an arguement.

>>750100

>It is a fallacy to just assert that I'm wrong because Catholicism says so. That's all I was saying. I'm not trying to tell Catholics what they believe.

He was saying that your knowledge about Catholic doctrine is wrong

>Do not ever mistake me for agreeing with Catholicism. Catholics practice pedobaptism by sprinkling.

Wew. Am I detecting some insecurity there? I'm so scared with your threat bro.

Also baptist by sprinkling is at the best doubtfully since water must run through your body. Sprinkling is actually a protestant practice.

>>750098

i'm just shitposting and i honestly can't tell who is saying what itt. i wish we had flags

>>750100

One more thing. You are actually agreeing with Catholic back there.

>>750108

Kek. Just.

>>750105

So, what do we accomplish when we pray?

>>750108

>i wish we had flags

This

>>750100

>I'm not trying to tell Catholics what they believe.

You are saying we believe in works salvation though.

>Do not ever mistake me for agreeing with Catholicism

But you do?

You:

>and I highly doubt the unbaptized are saved since they're not willing to follow the first step of christianity

Catholicism:

>And we believe that those who do not wish to partake in the sacrament of baptism are not worthy of heaven

>Baptism of Belief is possible in those who are not baptized yet want to be, opening the way for them to reach heaven

>>750114

Prayer

Pray is a verb

The Bible says "pray without ceasing"

Eat is a verb

The Bible says "take, eat; this is my body"

>>750119

The act of belief in Christ even as you guys define it its an act of the mind.

Therefore its a work.

>>750119

So by your categorization everything is a work? Is breathing a work? Surely by your definition of it being a verb it has to be.

>>750120

Interesting argument.

It's a totally internal action, doesn't have the same association as ergon. People do talk about thinking as mental work though

>>750122

Yes breathing is a work. It is not "good works" in the biblical sense, but it likewise can't bring salvation.

>>750126

Now, I see your point of view.

Works are pointless.

Everything is a work.

Therefor everything is pointless.

Stupid. Entirely stupid.

>>750126

Well riddle me this pal:

Works can't bring salvation

But Faith can bring salvation

And works can bring faith

Then why not recommend people to do works?

>>750125

So is praying.

More, believing is also a verb.

>>750131

>2 Peter 1:5-9

>For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith virtue; and to virtue, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. For if you possess these qualities and continue to grow in them, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But whoever lacks these traits is nearsighted to the point of blindness, having forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins.

>>750131

You only believe in Christ because someone had to work to print a Bible for you.

The works of the man who printed your Bible made faith in you.

>pic related

Thanks again for proving Catholicism point especially verse 21.

>>750131

this quote seems like it supports the catholic opinion

>>750132

Those words wrote literally written by a pope.

Do you expect him to believe them?

>>750131

That quote refers to works not bringing about salvation, not to works bringing about faith.

>>750133

You're shifting the subject of the work, the implication was that one's works in unbelief can make him a believer.

I was absolutely dependant on hearing the gospel preached to me for my salvation

>>750132

"Add to your faith" as in, it's already present

>>750135

Confirmation bias

I'm just about through defending my position against these spiteful attacks. This is a Catholic echo chamber, you people are sarcastically mocking me to each other. Do you think this is going to win me over? I came here for exegetical debate.

An hour ago I shared my stance on baptism. Someone else found it compelling and asked for a Catholic rebuttal >>750048

Despite the swarm of y'all calling me an idiot, nobody has bothered

>>750144

>You're shifting the subject of the work, the implication was that one's works in unbelief can make him a believer.

No one is saying that.

In fact what the church teaches is that for example a protestant no matter how much of a good person he is, how much money he gives to the poor even if he dies for Christ, if he dies in his heresy he goes to hell because outside the church there's no salvation. So you are again agreeing with us.

>I was absolutely dependant on hearing the gospel preached to me for my salvation

If there was no preachers doing their job, adoing literally their work, you wouldn't believe in Christ because you would hear the gospel in the first place.

>An hour ago I shared my stance on baptism. Someone else found it compelling and asked for a Catholic rebuttal

And we all refuted it. I don't know if anyone mentioned that anon but all he has to do is read the rest of the thread.

>>750116

>>750108

flag posting and no censorship on >>>/christianity/

>>750388

Is this schism number 10 now?

>>750100

>Appeal to Authority is a fallacy

Good luck proving that any country you haven't visited exists. You also might want to move out of wherever you live, don't drive cars, only eat what you've personally made yourself, and never listen to anyone. Because you literally cannot trust anyone under any circumstances if you believe that.

Appeal to Authority is completely valid. The authority just has to be an acceptable authority. But you can't even go at that angle unless you think Jesus Christ isn't a trustworthy authority.

>>750406

>>750082

So basically, just ignore the very things Jesus instituted (especially the Eucharist and Baptism), and just hold up a "Personality of Jesus" that is subject to random definition?

>>750406

For all our sakes, please learn the difference between personal experience and appeal to authority.

"Appeal to authority" is a fallacy that takes the form of "X is an authority on Y, therefore X is correct". X could very well be mistaken, experience does not make one immune to error, hence why this is a fallacy.

>>750513

Even if the authority could be wrong, if both parties in the argument agree that said authority is reliable for the purposes of the discussion then there is no further argument that needs to be done in that case. There is nothing fallacious about that at all. I have never been to Australia, I have no logic I could use to prove without a doubt that Australia exists. However, people I consider reliable have told me that Australia exists, therefore I accept that Australia exists with no further argument or proof necessary.

If the two parties are in disagreement on if said authority is reliable, then what your saying applies and the appeal to authority is no longer valid.

How could we have a discussion on any complex matters if we have to first prove on entirely logical grounds that any of the base assumptions that construct them are true?

For example, how could you have a discussion on electronics if you first have to prove that electricity exists and all electrical components that make up electronic machines are reliable?

>>750520

Discussion and argument itself breaks down without appeals to authority.

>>750520

>For example, how could you have a discussion on electronics if you first have to prove that electricity exists and all electrical components that make up electronic machines are reliable?

You accept them as common knowledge unless challenged otherwise, out of expedience. Even deep scientific proofs don't rehash commonly known knowledge. (Example: papers that involve geometry don't relitigate the validity of the Pythagorean theorem)

It's the form that challenge takes, and your response to it, that makes it a fallacy. The body of science has been wrong about a great many topics before, and it is lazy at best and dishonest at worse to pretend that someone is automatically correct without direct proof.

>>750531

But that would just mean that you're in a state of distrust for that authority. Getting back to what we were originally talking about was Jesus Christ, which I assume both of us agree is a reliable authority on moral and religious matters. Which would mean an appeal to authority isn't fallacious at all.

It's not the appeal, it's the authority itself. If we both agree that the authority is reliable, there's no need to argue.

>>750534

If the reliability of the authority isn't in question, then there is no problem with the appeal. It makes no sense at all to call that fallacious. That's like saying that a reliable authority isn't reliable.

If I say something like:

"Drinking alcohol is morally wrong because my Dad said so.". You can attack that from the angle of my father being unreliable.

But if I say:

"I believe that lighting is made of electricity because I leanred about it in school.". There are plenty of people that say schools are dens of government programming, but in this case, like you said before, the statement is accepted without argument. Now if someone came and said:. "I believe schools are dens of government programming, therefore I doubt that your school taught you accurately.". Then I would have to change my argument and defend my position on other grounds.

There isn't a fallacy unless there is a dissagreement on the reliability of the authority is what I'm trying to say.

>>750534

the fallacy in argumentation is when the quoted authority isn't authoritative to both parties, and no other supporting evidence is given.

This is a fallacious appeal to authority:

Baptist: "Baptism doesn't save you"

Catholic: "Catholics say it does. You are wrong."

This is not a fallacious appeal to authority:

X: "Danny Devito's favorite ice cream flavor is chocolate"

Y: "Danny Devito says his favorite flavor is vanilla"

>>750570

It sounds like we're saying the same thing.

>>750577

my mistake, we are

>>750577

>>750580

Agreed here, but the problem with the line of reasoning as part of an argument is that it immediately takes the discussion meta.

The right thing to do would be to directly demonstrate the truth of the claim rather than relying on the authority, short-circuiting the authority problem (which usually turns into adhom) entirely.

The wrong thing to do, and what happens 99% of the time when debating online, is the discussion turns into a thing where you're talking about sources rather than the truth or falsity of the claim.

>>750000

We need /baptist/ and /kjv/ to pick up their game.

>>749991

>Aren’t certain sacraments things you can buy to supposedly achieve salvation?

No and I'm glad I didn't write up a huge reply to the OP only to realize this is the level of the poster here. You haven't even gone so far as to google the question clearly.

>>750784

They're both up for claim, get 'em while they're hot!

>>749932

How is John 14:6 relevant to sacraments? Jesus approved of baptism, marriage (although He said chastity is better, He also said that marriage cannot be undone, therefore marriage is a sacrament by definition), ordination (this can be assumed based on the text of the Gospels and Acts) and He Himself instituted the Eucharist.

Sounds like Jesus' basic view is that religious life is sacramental, case closed.