Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

A Catholic and the laws of God

Expand Messages
  • setfreein1973@aol.com
    How do I respond to this Catholic? Here is what he wrote: Stan Protestantism is locked in the Law This is shown with their attitude to tithing (not altogether
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 14, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      How do I respond to this Catholic?  Here is what he wrote:
       
      Stan
       

      Protestantism is locked in the Law

      This is shown with their attitude to tithing (not altogether
      general); unreasonable image repulsion said to be "idolatry"; mode of
      claimed salvation (by "imputation" of perfection under the Law -
      claiming a Covering of Christ's) etc;

      But none greater than the absolute nonsensical claim that all sin is
      the same.

      To see no distinction between premeditated murder and a careless word
      of gossip is beyond being irrational - it destroys any plausibility
      of Luther's Gospel - but has to be accepted or the house of straw
      comes tumbling down.

      To support this nonsense we are pointed to the passage in Scripture
      that says if one breaks even a minute (already showuing a
      distinction) rule, one has still broken the Law and so is condemned.

      This is not only an example of not embracing the New Covenant of
      Grace and being stuck in the Law but dismisses one of the greatest
      achievements of Christianity.

      Because of Christ's teachings western civilisation in particular
      accepted the spirit of the law, no longer stuck with its letter. We
      now take circumstance into consideration, past history, degrees of
      guilt, mitigating circumstances, age, mental ability etc; when
      passing judgement.

      Protestants would have us believe that God is not as discerning as
      us, that God's Justice is more limited than ours, that God is also
      stuck in the Old Covenant.

      Johnny Catholic





    • ctwc_888
      Some Protestants tend towards legalism (which is the opposite extreme of antinomianism), but Protestantism in general is not locked in the law .
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 14, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Some Protestants tend towards 'legalism' (which is the opposite
        extreme of antinomianism), but Protestantism in general is
        not 'locked in the law'. Protestants recognize the moral laws
        (basically the Ten Commandments) as a guide to follow for life, but
        not as a means of salvation and no longer a curse and a burden and
        etc.

        This Catholic person's post though is too theologically confused and
        wrong to really even be respond-able (if that's a word). Catholics
        aren't known for their understanding of the Bible (or hence historic,
        apostolic, Biblical doctrine), and this one is not veering from that
        general reputation...

        I just reread Johnny Catholic's post and really he sounds like just a
        neophyte to theology. Kind of innocent-sounding... - C.



        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, setfreein1973@a...
        wrote:
        > How do I respond to this Catholic? Here is what he wrote:
        >
        > Stan
        >
        > Protestantism is locked in the Law
        >
        > This is shown with their attitude to tithing (not altogether
        > general); unreasonable image repulsion said to be "idolatry"; mode
        of
        > claimed salvation (by "imputation" of perfection under the Law -
        > claiming a Covering of Christ's) etc;
        >
        > But none greater than the absolute nonsensical claim that all sin
        is
        > the same.
        >
        > To see no distinction between premeditated murder and a careless
        word
        > of gossip is beyond being irrational - it destroys any plausibility
        > of Luther's Gospel - but has to be accepted or the house of straw
        > comes tumbling down.
        >
        > To support this nonsense we are pointed to the passage in Scripture
        > that says if one breaks even a minute (already showuing a
        > distinction) rule, one has still broken the Law and so is condemned.
        >
        > This is not only an example of not embracing the New Covenant of
        > Grace and being stuck in the Law but dismisses one of the greatest
        > achievements of Christianity.
        >
        > Because of Christ's teachings western civilisation in particular
        > accepted the spirit of the law, no longer stuck with its letter. We
        > now take circumstance into consideration, past history, degrees of
        > guilt, mitigating circumstances, age, mental ability etc; when
        > passing judgement.
        >
        > Protestants would have us believe that God is not as discerning as
        > us, that God's Justice is more limited than ours, that God is also
        > stuck in the Old Covenant.
        >
        > Johnny Catholic
      • puritanone
        In I Timothy 2:8-10 we read: I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women
        Message 3 of 3 , Apr 16, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          In I Timothy 2:8-10 we read: "I will therefore that men pray every
          where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like
          manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with
          shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or
          pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing
          godliness) with good works."

          The Apostolic Constitutions outlawed the use of all finger
          rings: "Neither do thou put a gold ring upon thy fingers; for all
          these ornaments are signs of lasciviousness, which if thou be
          solicitous about in an indecent manner, thou will not act as becomes
          a good man."

          John Calvin in his Commentaries on Genesis 24 wrote: " His adorning
          the damsel with precious ornaments is a token of his confidence. For
          since it is evident by many proofs that he was an honest and careful
          servant, he would not throw away without discretion the treasures of
          his master. He knows, therefore, that these gifts will not be ill-
          bestowed; or, at least, relying on the goodness of God, he gives
          them, in faith, as an earnest of future marriage. But it may be
          asked, Whether God approves ornaments of this kind, which pertain not
          so much to neatness as to pomp? I answer, that the things related in
          Scripture are not always proper to be imitated. Whatever the Lord
          commands in general terms is to be accounted as an inflexible rule of
          conduct; but to rely on particular examples is not only dangerous,
          but even foolish and absurd. Now we know how highly displeasing to
          God is not only pomp and ambition in adorning the body, but all kind
          of luxury. In order to free the heart from inward cupidity, he
          condemns that immoderate and superfluous splendor, which contains
          within itself many allurements to vice. Where, indeed, is pure
          sincerity of heart found under splendid ornaments? Certainly all
          acknowledge this virtue to be rare. It is not, however, for us
          expressly to forbid every kind of ornament; yet because whatever
          exceeds the frugal use of such things is tarnished with some degree
          of vanity; and more especially, because the cupidity of women is, on
          this point, insatiable; not only must moderation, but even
          abstinence, be cultivated as far as possible. Further, ambition
          silently creeps in, so that the somewhat excessive adorning of the
          person soon breaks out into disorder. With respect to the earrings
          and bracelets of Rebekah, as I do not doubt that they were those in
          use among the rich, so the uprightness of the age allowed them to be
          sparingly and frugally used; and yet I do not excuse the fault. This
          example, however, neither helps us, nor alleviates our guilt, if, by
          such means, we excite and continually inflame those depraved lusts
          which, even when all incentives are removed, it is excessively
          difficult to restrain. The women who desire to shine in gold, seek in
          Rebekah a pretext for their corruption. Why, therefore, do they not,
          in like manner, conform to the same austere kind of life and rustic
          labor to which she applied herself? But, as I have just said, they
          are deceived who imagine that the examples of the saints can sanction
          them in opposition to the common law of God..."

          Jewelry was outlawed in Calvin's Geneva, and the Puritans of Britain
          rejected jewelry as well.

          At http://www.puritans.net/news/attire040604.htm , in an article
          entitled On Jewelry and Attire, I have sought to explain my
          **tentative* conclusions on this topic. I would very much appreciate
          feedback from others on this topic. I should add that neither my
          family nor I have yet implemented the conclusions of this article. I
          would very much like to read any objections people may have either
          from a theological or historical standpoint.

          - Parnell McCarter
          www.puritans.net
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.