Coram Deo Baptist

@ShaneSchaetzel @Bashskaf Started out right and then you reversed the cause and effect and it began to erode, culminating in a complete misunderstanding of Sola Fide.

The good thief was saved by God’s gratuitous grace through a living faith animated by charity and repentance. Nailed to the cross with no time or ability for water baptism or a lifetime of good works, he publicly acknowledged his guilt, defended Christ’s innocence, and humbly asked Jesus to remember him in his kingdom (Luke 23:40-42). Christ responded with the direct promise, “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43), supplying the graces of baptism of desire because God is not bound by the sacraments He established as the ordinary path to salvation. This does not affirm the Protestant doctrine of sola fide (“faith alone” understood as mere intellectual belief apart from charity or cooperation with grace). Rather, justifying faith must be formed by love and expressed in whatever acts of repentance and obedience are possible; the thief’s brief but genuine conversion produced the only works available to him in that moment. His case remains an example of divine mercy at the hour of death, not a model permitting ordinary Christians to bypass baptism, confirmation and the Eucharist, ongoing conversion, or a life of charity while presuming certain salvation.

We are NOT saved by Faith Alone.👇🏻

@ShaneSchaetzel But one is justified through faith alone.

@Herr_Oberst45 @TrevorSheatz @michaeljknowles 4 half brothers

@TrevorSheatz @michaeljknowles How many brothers and sisters did the Lord Jesus have then? More than 5? More than 10? How many?

When it comes to the perpetual virginity of Mary, do you agree with the Catholic view or with the view of Protestant reformers Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, and John Wesley?

@FourEyedEagle @OrdinariateUSA I reread it a few times. I think you misunderstand Sola Scriptura. The doctrine does not imply that no interpretation is required. That would be absurd. Every time we speak to each other we are performing interpretation. Just as I had difficulty interpreting your post.

@severegrace @OrdinariateUSA The literal words in the Bible contradict sola fide, as quoted by Zachariah. An understanding of any text is an interpretation, so if your understanding of a certain verse isn't just the text you are destroying sola scriptura. They are mutually exclusive

I don’t get why evangelicals think they can disprove one Bible verse by quoting another Bible verse Example “James 2:17: you see we are justified by works and not by faith alone” Instead of addressing the verse, they will just respond with Galatians 2:8-9 They will put scripture at war with itself to prove their doctrine instead of reading all of scripture together

@FourEyedEagle @OrdinariateUSA Does the teaching of your church require an interpretation for you to understand it? Is it not also verbal?

@betostaxes @jacelala All I said was that the Eucharist is a scriptural concept. How did you extrapolate the insight into my hermeneutic? You do realize that the record of Scripture extends thousands of years B.C., right? Is all of that the history of the Catholic church? Continues? Is the Canon open?

@severegrace @jacelala You treat scripture like something to discover. It’s a written record of what the Catholic Church experienced and continues to experience

Lord of the Rings is Catholic. It’s disturbing people don’t know this

@FourEyedEagle @OrdinariateUSA Are you saying without an "interpretation" there is no contradiction? Or are you saying that your interpretation doesn't contradict Sola Fide? Or, that your understanding of Sola Scriptura requires an interpretation of Sola Fide?

@severegrace @OrdinariateUSA No, because that requires an interpretation, which protestants are against as of sola scriptura

@RodRuiz14 @jacelala Yes, thank you. I was asking what aspects were particularly Catholic. I already knew and never doubted that Tolkien was Catholic and had this in mind when writing. But does that mean the symbolism he inserted was uniquely Catholic?

@severegrace @jacelala Letter 142 The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision. That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like ‘religion’, to cults or practices, 🧵

@betostaxes @jacelala It is a Scriptural practice, de facto. Simply stating something beyond this does not make it so. Would that be the Judean Catholic Church?

@severegrace @jacelala Does your Baptist church spend time worshipping the Eucharist?

@betostaxes @jacelala Nope. But we eat the Eucharist. Did you think Catholicism trademarked that word?

@OrdinariateUSA Is it possible it only contradicts your understanding of Sola Fide and not the actual Reformed doctrine?

@severegrace In Protestant theology, yes, because James 2:14-26 directly contradicts “faith alone”

@betostaxes @jacelala And the Eucharist is particular to Catholicism?

@severegrace @jacelala The Lembas bread is the Eucharist per the author

@crowe_justinp Is it possible that the interpretation of the Magisterium is what's holding him back?

His “interpretation” is really what’s holding him back.

@josephnollasj Of "those both of women" how many were without sin?

Mary was born without the stain of Original Sin. But let’s not forget that all the angels (even the rebel angels) were created without sin. And let’s not forget that Adam and Eve were created without sin. All this to say, sin is unnatural. It’s an infection, the most dangerous of infections - but sin has never been what it means to be human. When Christ’s victory is brought to completion in us, and our wills are purified and transformed to the point where sin becomes inconceivable for us, then we will be perfectly human and perfectly natural - we will be precisely as God intended us to be.

@HoldenCCole Why do you care if it's Biblical?

Sola Scriptura isn’t Biblical.

@MrCasey62 Typically, you can tell words are different when they are spelled differently.

Today’s installment of “Evangelicals don’t know the Bible”: Evangelical: “There is nothing lacking in the suffering of Christ.” St. Paul: “I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, & I am completing in my flesh WHAT IS LACKING IN THE SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST…” ~ Col 1:24

@UcheMaryOkoli And “the words of the priest create Jesus Christ.”

I don't care what anyone says. You can even block me after this tweet. The Eucharist is Jesus himself. You are in the wrong "church" if you don't celebrate Mass there. The Eucharist is not a symbol. It is Jesus in his full and entire form...Body, Blood, Soul and Divinty. Count yourself blessed and lucky that as a Catholic, you get to partake in this great spiritual feast. Jesus himself made it clear that this is His Body. Not his symbol. But His Body! Let that sink in!

@UcheMaryOkoli And that if “the person of the Redeemer had not as yet been in the world,” the priest, by pronouncing the words of consecration, “would produce this great person of a Man-God.”