Roman Catholic Gospel and the Protestant Gospel (Jesus, salvation, godless)

bible truth · #1 05-03-2007, 09:33 AM

To all who are reading,

I sincerely apologize to everyone for participating in too many Threads to effectively debate with you. As I mentioned, I am new on this Forum. This site is the evangelical's dream site. I'm like the kid in the candy store. You have my word that I will only participate on two Threads. I will participate on the "LDS Articles of Faith" Thread and this one. This debate should really have postings between Roman Catholics and Protestants who embrace the Reformer's understanding of the Gospel. What I mean by the gospel can be summarized by the Apostle Paul:

Romans 1:16-18
I am obligated both to Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and the foolish. That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are at Rome. I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

What is Rome’s understand of the gospel Paul is so eager to preach? I will represent the Historical Protestant Reformation gospel as declared in the solas. I welcome my Roman Catholic friend to first post the Gospel according to Rome. - BT

SoyLeche · #2 05-03-2007, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bible truth

I sincerely apologize to everyone for participating in too many Threads to effectively debate with you.

Let's try an experiement then. Don't post to any other threads than this one for at least 2 days. We'll see if you are actually able to debate without the distractions of other threads.

bible truth · #3 05-03-2007, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoyLeche

Let's try an experiement then. Don't post to any other threads than this one for at least 2 days. We'll see if you are actually able to debate without the distractions of other threads.

Thanks for the help. However, I wanted to participate on this Thread and the "LDS Articles of Faith" Thread at the same time. Please reread the first Post on this thread. I just posted an answer to point 2 in the Articles of Faith in the light of Scriputre. Please read it. - BT

Runlikethewind · #4 05-03-2007, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bible truth

What is Rome’s understand of the gospel Paul is so eager to preach? I will represent the Historical Protestant Reformation gospel as declared in the solas. I welcome my Roman Catholic friend to first post the Gospel according to Rome. - BT

The Gospel that Paul is so eager to preach is the good news revealed to the Apostles by Jesus. I Don't think it is possible to post the "Gospel according to Rome" as you put it since I am not sure what exactly you mean by that. In general the message is is best summed up by the most famous scripture passage in the Bible John 3:16. God took on humanity in the second person of the trinity and died for the sins of all humankind. That is overly simplified of course but that is the main point I guess. Jesus both God and man died for our sins so that all could have access to eternal life. Is that what you are looking for? Does that qualify for the "Gospel according to Rome" or where you looking for something else, more elaborate or in depth perhaps?

sojourner · #5 05-03-2007, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Roman Catholics and Protestants who embrace the Reformer's understanding of the Gospel.

What about Protestants who don't embrace the Reformer's understanding of the gospel? Who is "the Reformer," anyway? Luther? Calvin? Zwingli? Cranmer? Fox? Menno? Wesley? Eddy? Smith? Moon? Karesh?

bible truth · #6 05-03-2007, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Runlikethewind

The Gospel that Paul is so eager to preach is the good news revealed to the Apostles by Jesus. I Don't think it is possible to post the "Gospel according to Rome" as you put it since I am not sure what exactly you mean by that. In general the message is is best summed up by the most famous scripture passage in the Bible John 3:16. God took on humanity in the second person of the trinity and died for the sins of all humankind. That is overly simplified of course but that is the main point I guess. Jesus both God and man died for our sins so that all could have access to eternal life. Is that what you are looking for? Does that qualify for the "Gospel according to Rome" or where you looking for something else, more elaborate or in depth perhaps?

Come on my friend, you can do better than that. You are Roman Catholic bound by the official dogmas of Rome. Here's some help for you. I embrace what the Council of Trent had anathema in defining the gospel of the Reformers. I am protestant, protesting Rome’s way of salvation through the sacraments. I believe the heart of the gospel is justification through faith alone. Even if you say the Council of Trent anathemas do not apply to me, it still defines what you are supposed to believe or not believe. Try it again my friend, please proclaim the gospel according to Rome through the sacraments, especially the Eucharist. Paul said he is not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God for those who believe. Don’t be ashamed or Rome’s understanding of the gospel. Please just share it to the best of your ability. - BT

bible truth · #7 05-03-2007, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojourner

What about Protestants who don't embrace the Reformer's understanding of the gospel? Who is "the Reformer," anyway? Luther? Calvin? Zwingli? Cranmer? Fox? Menno? Wesley? Eddy? Smith? Moon? Karesh?

How about within the context of the Council of Trent and the Westminster Confession of Faith? I don't belielve any Reformed Christians would argue with that. Please reread the first Thread again.

sojourner · #8 05-03-2007, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bible truth

How about within the context of the Council of Trent and the Westminster Confession of Faith? I don't belielve any Reformed Christians would argue with that. Please reread the first Thread again.

The Episcopalians would. The Disciples of Christ would. Probably the Mennonites and Friends would, too. The Orthodox would.

Once again...who is "the Reformer?"

Runlikethewind · #9 05-03-2007, 10:55 AM

Hello Bible Truth

Quote:

Originally Posted by bible truth

Try it again my friend, please proclaim the gospel according to Rome through the sacraments, especially the Eucharist.

Ok this helps, I see what you are getting at. This is a very complex subject we are dealing with so let me start by saying that the Catholic Church, to my knowledge, is not a Sola kind of Church. Sola fide, sola gratia, sola scriptora, etc, we don’t really see things like this. We recognize the need and the importance of grace, faith and scripture but we really don’t see it as an alone type of thing. Grace is necessary, no one can be saved outside of God’s sanctifying grace, but is faith involved in any way too? Of course faith helps to strengthen, find and to acquire grace. How does one inform their faith? Of course scripture is key but is scripture alone enough? One needs to interpret scripture and so in order to do so history and the context of what was written and other factors must be taken into account. So it is not a matter of faith alone or grace alone or scripture alone. They all play a role in the Catholic understanding of the Gospel and I don’t think that there is any primacy given to one or the other.

Having said that, the “gospel of Rome”as you put it, believes that salvation is a gift from God freely given to those who accept it. Grace is transmitted to the faithful through the sacraments. Grace can be given by God and received by anyone without the sacraments, God is not bound by the sacraments. But the Church teaches that the sacraments are the best way to receive God’s grace since they are in keeping with our human nature as spiritual/physical beings and that they where instituted by Christ.

Now when I say instituted I do not mean that Jesus actually sat down and said “here is the sacrament of baptism and here is the sacrament of Eucharist...etc”. By instituted I mean that the have their roots in Christ but have developed over time as our understanding of the Gospel has increased. So if you want me to point to the chapter and verse where Jesus institutes the sacrament of the Eucharist or any other sacrament it is not that easy. We can show the roots of the sacrament in scripture, we could support the sacraments by things said in scripture, but it amounts to a particular understanding of what the verse means. I am sure you are aware of the standard passages including the last supper “this is my body” and the sermon on the mount and such but you would likely disagree with the interpretation that we have of them. So that kind of puts us at an impasse since I will say when Jesus said this is my body he meant it is for real and you might say he just meant it symbolically. How would we proceed from there to show which interpretation is more accurate?

Now when I say that the sacraments are the best way of receiving grace according to our human nature I mean that the sacraments allow us to receive grace with our whole nature and not just part of our nature. The Church teaches that we are not a soul and a body connected somehow but that the soul and the body come together to form a single new nature, an embodied soul or ensould body if you will. What this means it that or nature is simultaneously spiritual and physical. If we receive grace from God through faith alone we are only receiving it with part of our being, the spiritual part. If we receive grace through faith in the sacraments we receive it with our whole being, body and spirit. That is a better way to receive grace, with our whole being and not just part of our being.