29 July 2016

Picking At Fruit That Isn't Yours Is A Crime


One interesting issue between Protestant and Catholic dogma is salvation and works.

Sadly, it seems man's nature is to choose a side (usually the one they agree with, are a part of, etc.), instead of seeing how both sides may be either correct, partially correct, partially incorrect, or incorrect.

The Catholic perception may say that one isn't saved without doing good works.

The Protestant perception may say that no one can do anything to save themselves (no works-based salvation).

Can both of these statements be true?

I don't see the Catholic dogma arguing for a works-based salvation, but assumes salvation is already there, so people are simply asked to do good things with their gift of grace.

What other reason does God save a human if not to do good and have Christ work through them?

Haven't these works been prepared by God in advance for the faithful to accomplish?

You work because you are saved, not to stay saved or to be saved in the first place... but men do misunderstand even the simplest of things, most likely because they've been listening to confused minds for far too long.

The Protestant dogma, instead of understanding this concept, argues from the issues raised in the rebellion / reformation, and after having brought all things from Catholicism's past into a present contextual contention, the argument fails to realize that the issue is with the manner something was written despite the message being agreeable and / or correct.

With this said, not everything labeled Catholic is agreeable, at least not with this man.

I'd like to think I see somewhat clearly where men began to build upon fantasy and their own conclusions aside from what the Holy Spirit was and was not authorizing.

I don't think torture was ordained by God, nor was burning people at the stake regardless of their crime.

It is unimaginable that Christ would allow for the death of the church's enemies when there is a teaching stating "love your enemies and do good to those who persecute you ... leaving room for God's justice."

This is evidence where men lost their moral compass after having experienced temporal power; pride and arrogance trumping love for others.

Same is said regarding the Protestant reformation and every issue raised in protest; arguing over things which cannot be proven but are only contended due to doubt, suspicion and lack of information (the not so obvious issues).

One case in point is infant baptism.

The baptizing of infants and children was a practice going back to the 1st century, being practiced since then in all associated churches on earth until the reformation brought this reality into contention, using the 'sola scripura' dogma, yet for nearly 1500 years God seems to allow the baptism of the young without issue.

Man's fallibility has given rise to some ridiculous and contradictory dogmas from both groups.

In reference to the Catholic dogmas: infallibility of certain men and their teachings, forbidding men to marry, calling men 'father' when only the Father shall be addressed as such, just to name a few.

In reference to Protestant dogmas: judging a man according to what that man specifically believes (or doesn't), making up new doctrines and 'prophecies' which continue to cause division, arrogance in claiming to have a 'better' doctrine than another group, just to name a few.

Back to salvation and works; this is where "faith without deeds is dead" comes into play.

The person who thinks they can simply believe in God but does not walk as Jesus walked or follow through with where it says "whatever you did for the leasts of these you did for me" may be fooling themselves.

So also the person who doesn't make a whole-heart effort to repent of the sins that will disqualify them from the kingdom, for they may love their sin more than the call to obedience, desiring to instead avoid the suffering that comes from not being like the world standard of depravity.

A humanistic approach to salvation, part of the attack against the Catholic dogma, is to cover bad deeds with good works, as a way to work-off the bad done or outweigh the bad with the good.

This is another manner of fooling one's self - this dogma is similar to the Muslim dogma of hoping one's good deeds outweigh the bad deeds in an attempt to please God by human effort.

When people already see one group as an enemy, instead of another part of the one body of Christ (speaking again to the divisions between Catholic and Protestant dogmas), it is difficult for individuals to see their own sin when they are always desiring to point out the sins of another group... but it seems God has allowed for another group to be a counterpart of the former for a reason.

No comments: