Bible 1 Yr – Day 91 – Paul’s Speech in the Temple

Old Testament

Today’s reading give us a second verse quoted by Jesus to Satan during the temptation in the desert. There is subtle but important way this verse is phrased. The verse Jesus will later quote is:

And he [God] humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.

Notice, this verse is equating the manna and the word. It suggests that the manna, which was a bread like substance the Israelites actually ate, comes forth from the mouth of God. Of course we know that Jesus is the word made flesh. So we have the word made bread and the word made flesh. Those two are the same thing! And later Jesus will say, “I am the bread of life” and over blessed bread, “this is my body”.

New Testament

Today we read the speech delivered by Paul to the crowd in the temple that wants to kill him. He starts by speaking Hebrew. This is to let the crowd know that he is a Jew. Then he details his bona fides that he studied under the great rabbi G and that he earnestly persecuted the Christians.

Notice he recounts his conversion and he repeats the same words we read previously, “Saul, Saul why do you persecute ME”. It wasn’t a mistake or a misstatement. Jesus is so intimately connected to us that he counts the persecutions of this followers the same as if he is being persecuted himself.

Then we read this important statement about Paul’s baptism:

16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.

Notice, here baptism is described as having the effect of washing away your sins. It is not merely a symbol of an inner reality (although it is that too) but it action that has the effect of doing what it represents. This is the definition of sacrament. Christ gave us instructions to do things. If these things were merely symbols there would be no effective change from the old covenant. However, because Christ’s sacrifice is effective and because he is so closely bound up with the Church He makes the things he instructed us to do effective. That is why we see here that when Paul is baptized it actually washed away sins. That is why when we see the Apostles lay hands on converts we are told that the Holy Spirit actually comes down upon them. That is why marriage is an unbreakable bond between two people where the two become one flesh. That is why when the Priest says, “this is my body” it actually becomes the body and blood of the Lord.

This entry was posted in Bible Study, Catholic, Catholicism, Christianity and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Bible 1 Yr – Day 91 – Paul’s Speech in the Temple

  1. Jon musso says:

    That just a miss understanding of Paul! he saying we need a true circumcised heart. we must have a taking off and putting on of christ. It’s symbolic for what he did for us, and what he will do when he returns.

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      Where does it say, “this is a symbol” or “this is a parable”? Was Christ crucified or was that merely a symbol and it has no significance? Your personal interpretation said it, not St. Paul.

    • Is everything a symbol? Why would Jesus calm to replace the meeting with symbols of the old testament with new meeting with symbols of the New Testament? It always baffles me how so many “Bible believing” Christians don’t believe what the Bible says.

      • Jon musso says:

        Because we have the ultimate reality in Christ your being legalistic. Paul was completely destroying legalism. Stay near the cross. Read galations letter read Ephesians 1 read it and yeild it the cross.

      • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

        How much closer can a Catholic receiving the Eucharist get to the cross when it is Jesus Christ that literally dwells within them?

  2. Jon musso says:

    You don’t get closer through a ritual you get through remembrance of what he did for you. The symbol has power it bringing you to a place of remembrance.

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      Why would Christ institute the Eucharist if the Apostolic age was over after the first ones? The Eucharistic celebration is the re-presentation of Him.

      • Jon musso says:

        Justin it’s why its symbolic if we were still in the apostolic age than yeah I would agree the elements are a symbol of what God did for us. I believe the Eucharist is important, but not because the elements are actually jesus body and blood, but because a savior has come and has taking the sin of the world away. We are now new creation new has come the old has passed away.

      • So its a symbol but if we were still in the Apostolic age then it would have been what? A really special symbol? Was the Eucharist really the body and blood of the Lord when the Apostles consecrated the elements? So did Jesus create a temporary sacrament with a cosmic expiration dates. Today we read that the Baptism of Paul actually washed away his sins. We recently read 3 times that the laying on of hands actually conveyed the Holy Spirit. All these great gifts God give the Church and they vanish when the Apostles die. But there is not one verse to support that. There is not one father of the Church who records that. In contrast, all the father of the Church continually record the belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

        Ignatius of Antioch

        “I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible” (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

        “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).

        Justin Martyr

        “We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).


        “If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?” (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).

        “He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (ibid., 5:2).

        Clement of Alexandria

        “’Eat my flesh,’ [Jesus] says, ‘and drink my blood.’ The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients, he delivers over his flesh and pours out his blood, and nothing is lacking for the growth of his children” (The Instructor of Children 1:6:43:3 [A.D. 191]).


        “[T]here is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).

    • So it’s a symbol that brings about a remembrance of Jesus and helps us get closer to him but the ritual to bring about that symbol is meaningless?

  3. If I am being legalistic than most things that Jesus did our completely without meeting. The sermon on the mount meaningless. Healing of the sick meaningless. The Last Supper meaningless. Why would Jesus do so many things that have no meaning?

    • Jon musso says:

      The meaning Im christ worship me. Again we are called to a life of obedience, but to earn God favor, but to honor the favor giving to you buy christ suddle difference but, it’s a huge difference.

      • Jon musso says:

        But not to earn God favor

      • You just made the point I started with in the post. We are called to a life of obedience. To honor the favor given us. Jesus said “do this in memory of me”. Thus God has told us how to honor the favor he has given us and we are bound to do so. Therefore God desires proper worship in the manner he established.

  4. Jon musso says:

    Yes but your implication are wrong! You keep point to these ritual as justifying works you have to split the doctrines.

    • I don’t think anyone brought up works in this thread besides you. My point was that in the OT God established proper worship. We see a corresponding establishment of proper worship in the NT. We can also look to the scripture which often refers to the “breaking of the bread”. We can also look to the Church fathers who recorded the form of the mass in the first century. God asks us for proper worship. Did your Church have the breaking of the bread today?

      • Jon musso says:

        Yes, but the implication how you see Eucharist the church is a work righteous faith. The proper worship is submission to the things of God. How you see these theology is important.

      • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

        Who declares “proper worship”, Jon? If the Bible, then Catholics are abiding by your version as it’s in complete line with Christ’s own teachings.

  5. Jon musso says:

    Justin the catholic worship pattern is not in line with scripture, it in line with your version of the truth of how you see catholic teaching. The bible points to jesus as savior. Not a worship of statue or legalism that you believe in. Galations 3:1-6 argue completely against catholic doctrine maybe if you remove Paul you could have an argument, but you can’t paul whole argument was to leave the law and turn to the savior! You want to ignore these teaching because Paul is 100 percent fighting against catholic and the Jewish doctrine of circumcision! Paul whole argument he saying turn from catholic legalism and turn to a relationship with Christ. The law is fullfilled in christ. To be fair we will never agree on this it’s been a debate from the beginning of the church. I have no problem saying the Catholic Church hold the church as authoritative as the bible, and i dont think you can deny that! I see christ as the ultimate authority you see Christ and the church as authoritative unit. You see them one in the same. I appreciate your perspective, but I will never conclude that because I don’t believe the bible does. God bless

  6. Jon musso says:

    Which produce a life worthy of the gospel not a works righteousness!

  7. Jon musso says:

    No baptism is a identification to an outward act of an inward decision. So no, but I think it important!

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      Martin Luther even disagrees: “. He wrote: “Baptism is no human plaything but is instituted by God himself. Moreover, it is solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we shall not be saved. We are not to regard it as an indifferent matter, then, like putting on a new red coat. It is of the greatest importance that we regard baptism as excellent, glorious, and exalted” (Large Catechism 4:6).

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      So does Jesus Christ!
      John 3:5 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

      5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      1 Peter 3:21 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

      21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ…

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      Romans 6:3-4 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

      3 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

      Who wrote Romans, Jon?

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      “Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life. . . . [But] a viper of the [Gnostic] Cainite heresy, lately conversant in this quarter, has carried away a great number with her most venomous doctrine, making it her first aim to destroy baptism—which is quite in accordance with nature, for vipers and.asps . . . themselves generally do live in arid and waterless places. But we, little fishes after the example of our [Great] Fish, Jesus Christ, are born in water, nor have we safety in any other way than by permanently abiding in water. So that most monstrous creature, who had no right to teach even sound doctrine, knew full well how to kill the little fishes—by taking them away from the water!” – – Tertullian, Baptism 1 [A.D. 203]).

      • Jon musso says:

        Paul uses baptism differently than the way your using it. baptism put you into the covenant community.romans 6 and 4 give us a picture. Baptism is still about God his tear off its the picture of circumcision.

  8. Jon musso says:

    Being part of the covenant community does not save you, but to answer your question Paul wrote romans also galations and yeah Ephesians you know grace filled book that disqualified your postion! God bless

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      You are quite literally making up your own Scripture and it’s astounding.

      • Jon musso says:

        Hear you go Justin hear some scriptures that should shut your mouth for a while. Ephesians 1-3 blessed be the God and father of our lord Jesus christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purposes of his will. Let start with what he does not say! He does not say you are justified because you are apart of the Catholic Church, or because you were baptized or because you actual eat the literal body of God, and drank his blood at the Eucharist. Before you even came up with your bad theology he predestined your future. Why because he God and he wanted it that way. Let move on romans 8:28- 29 and we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 now listen Justin for those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his son, in order that he might be the first born among many brothers. Galations 3 1:6 I have already wrote about this o foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicaly portrayed as crucified let me ask you only this: did you recieve the spirit by works of the law or by hearing by faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the spirit are you now being perfect by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain- if indeed it was in vain? Does he who supply the spirit to you and work miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing through faith- just as Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteous. Now the argument you can make is he talking about second temple Judaism. Hear the theme of the book though Christ’s death has brought in the age of the new covenant(3:23-26;4:4-5,24) in which believers do not have to become Jews or follow the outward ceremonies of the mosaic law(2:3,11-12,14 4:10) to require these things is to deny the heart of the gospel, which is justification by faith alone, not obedience to the law. (2:16 1:6-7) in the new age Christians are to live in the guidance and power of the spirit. (5-6) you wanted scripture their you go again Justin Paul does not match up to what your theology is saying his whole journey is to remove the work righteous thinking and bring in the gospel and what is the gospel? The gospel is the saving power of Jesus christ. Through justification by faith. I will trust Paul over the pope. Have a beautiful day.

      • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

        St. Paul was Catholic who trusted Jesus Christ. Mouth will never shut. I trust Jesus Christ and the Church more than JonMussoanity.

      • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

        Correction: I don’t trust JonMussoanity at all.

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      Circumcision was part of the law in the OT and Baptism is the requirement in the same way in the NT. Being Baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit was the same when John the Baptist Baptized Jesus Christ, when St. Paul was Baptized, when I was Baptized, and when Dave VT was Baptized.

      You’re perverting things for your personal ideology, not St. Paul. If he was doing what you claim he would not have made it into the Bible. The Church is not divided amongst itself. Do you see what Tertullian said about those who take others away and destroy this Sacrament? I have shown you Baptism DOES save a soul. I have shown you the proof from Scripture and you reject it. Now it is clear who is outside of Truth.

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:


      “‘I have heard, sir,’ said I [to the Shepherd], ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’” (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]).

      Justin the Martyr

      “As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly . . . are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Except you be born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]” (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).


      “Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life. . . . [But] a viper of the [Gnostic] Cainite heresy, lately conversant in this quarter, has carried away a great number with her most venomous doctrine, making it her first aim to destroy baptism—which is quite in accordance with nature, for vipers and.asps . . . themselves generally do live in arid and waterless places. But we, little fishes after the example of our [Great] Fish, Jesus Christ, are born in water, nor have we safety in any other way than by permanently abiding in water. So that most monstrous creature, who had no right to teach even sound doctrine, knew full well how to kill the little fishes—by taking them away from the water!” (Baptism 1 [A.D. 203]).

      “Without baptism, salvation is attainable by none” (ibid., 12).

      “We have, indeed, a second [baptismal] font which is one with the former [water baptism]: namely, that of blood, of which the Lord says: ‘I am to be baptized with a baptism’ [Luke 12:50], when he had already been baptized. He had come through water and blood, as John wrote [1 John 5:6], so that he might be baptized with water and glorified with blood. . . . This is the baptism which replaces that of the fountain, when it has not been received, and restores it when it has been lost” (ibid., 16).


      “[P]erhaps someone will ask, ‘What does it conduce unto piety to be baptized?’ In the first place, that you may do what has seemed good to God; in the next place, being born again by water unto God so that you change your first birth, which was from concupiscence, and are able to attain salvation, which would otherwise be impossible. For thus the [prophet] has sworn to us: ‘Amen, I say to you, unless you are born again with living water, into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ Therefore, fly to the water, for this alone can extinguish the fire. He who will not come to the water still carries around with him the spirit of insanity for the sake of which he will not come to the living water for his own salvation” (Homilies11:26 [A.D. 217]).


      “It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism” (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 [A.D. 235]).

      Cyprian of Carthage

      “[T]he baptism of public witness and of blood cannot profit a heretic unto salvation, because there is no salvation outside the Church.” (Letters 72[73]:21 [A.D. 253]).

      “[Catechumens who suffer martyrdom] are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism. Rather, they are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord said that he had another baptism with which he himself was to be baptized [Luke 12:50]” (ibid., 72[73]:22).

      Cyril of Jerusalem

      “If any man does not receive baptism, he does not have salvation. The only exception is the martyrs, who even without water will receive the kingdom.
      . . . For the Savior calls martyrdom a baptism, saying, ‘Can you drink the cup which I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am to be baptized [Mark 10:38]?’ Indeed, the martyrs too confess, by being made a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men [1 Cor. 4:9]” (Catechetical Lectures 3:10 [A.D. 350]).

      Gregory Nazianz

      “[Besides the baptisms associated with Moses, John, and Jesus] I know also a fourth baptism, that by martyrdom and blood, by which also Christ himself was baptized. This one is far more august than the others, since it cannot be defiled by later sins” (Oration on the Holy Lights 39:17 [A.D. 381]).

      Pope Siricius

      “It would tend to the ruin of our souls if, from our refusal of the saving font of baptism to those who seek it, any of them should depart this life and lose the kingdom and eternal life” (Letter to Himerius 3 [A.D. 385]).

      John Chrysostom

      “Do not be surprised that I call martyrdom a baptism, for here too the Spirit comes in great haste and there is the taking away of sins and a wonderful and marvelous cleansing of the soul, and just as those being baptized are washed in water, so too those being martyred are washed in their own blood” (Panegyric on St. Lucian 2 [A.D. 387]).

      Ambrose of Milan

      “But I hear you lamenting because he [the Emperor Valentinian] had not received the sacraments of baptism. Tell me, what else could we have, except the will to it, the asking for it? He too had just now this desire, and after he came into Italy it was begun, and a short time ago he signified that he wished to be baptized by me. Did he, then, not have the grace which he desired? Did he not have what he eagerly sought? Certainly, because he sought it, he received it. What else does it mean: ‘Whatever just man shall be overtaken by death, his soul shall be at rest [Wis. 4:7]’?” (Sympathy at the Death of Valentinian [A.D. 392]).


      “There are three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptism, in prayer, and in the greater humility of penance; yet God does not forgive sins except to the baptized” (Sermons to Catechumens on the Creed 7:15 [A.D. 395]).

      “I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person. . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44–48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13–19]” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:21:28 [A.D. 400]).

      “That the place of baptism is sometimes supplied by suffering is supported by a substantial argument which the same blessed Cyprian draws from the circumstance of the thief, to whom, although not baptized, it was said, ‘Today you shall be with me in paradise’ [Luke 23:43]. Considering this over and over again, I find that not only suffering for the name of Christ can supply for that which is lacking by way of baptism, but even faith and conversion of heart [i.e., baptism of desire] if, perhaps, because of the circumstances of the time, recourse cannot be had to the celebration of the mystery of baptism” (ibid., 4:22:29).

      “When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, it is the position of the heart that we must consider, not that of the body. . . . All who are within [the Church] in heart are saved in the unity of the ark [by baptism of desire]” (ibid., 5:28:39).

      “[According to] apostolic tradition . . . the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal. This is the witness of Scripture too” (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:24:34 [A.D. 412]).

      “Those who, though they have not received the washing of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ—it avails them just as much for the forgiveness of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of baptism. For he that said, ‘If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5], made an exception for them in that other statement in which he says no less generally, ‘Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father, who is in heaven’ [Matt. 10:32]” (The City of God 13:7 [A.D. 419]).

      Pope Leo I

      “And because of the transgression of the first man, the whole stock of the human race was tainted; no one can be set free from the state of the old Adam save through Christ’s sacrament of baptism, in which there are no distinctions between the reborn, as the apostle [Paul] says, ‘For as many of you as were baptized in Christ did put on Christ; there is neither Jew nor Greek . . . ‘ [Gal. 3:27–28]” (Letters 15:10[11] [A.D. 445]).

      Fulgentius of Ruspe

      “From that time at which our Savior said, ‘If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5], no one can, without the sacrament of baptism, except those who, in the Catholic Church, without baptism, pour out their blood for Christ, receive the kingdom of heaven and life eternal” (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).

  9. Jon musso says:

    Well your right I should be arguing with some one who has no clue, it’s really Im foolishness to even respond to you.

  10. Jon musso says:

    You catholics should read romans 5:1 it’s a amazing passage or romans 3:22 these good passage that Paul keep getting in the way. So annoying!

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      You ought to read passages besides what St. Paul has written. Do you follow Christ or a perverted version of St. Paul?

  11. Jon musso says:

    If we could just remove romans, Ephesians and galations your argument would be so much better. Oh one more thing in john 3:5 he talking about the Holy Spirit. Nicodemus. Have a good Monday.

    • 1. This thread is getting repetitive and unhelpful.

      2. No one is denying justification by faith. Catholics accept justification by faith.

      3. No one is arguing justification by works. Catholics do not believe in Justification by works.

      4. However, none of the passages you cite on justification support the proposition of justification by faith alone.

      5. “Works of the law” is a colloquialism to the Jewish people. It refers to works REQUIRED by the mosaic law. It does not refer to good works.

      6. We have already seen this year dozens of examples referencing good works as necessary to the process of sanctification. In the past you have conceded this point. It is disingenuous of you continually debate works justification when you know that we are not proposing works justification but when we are discussing good works we are talking about the process of sanctification.

      7. Nothing in the verses you cited addresses the original points made that (a) while we are certainly initially justified by faith (a Catholic would say grace) that does not mean that things like baptism actually impart grace and accomplish the sign the represent and (b) the passages from the other day point to a desire by God for proper worship.

      8. In fact the verse you sight from John says, “unless you are born of WATER AND the spirit…”

      9. The place in bible were the words “faith” and “alone” appear in the same sentence is James and it specifically says, “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. Jam 2:24” However, we do NOT take this to mean we are justified by works or by works alone. Our only point to you is that these verse are establishing that BOTH polar positions are wrong.

      10. All goes back to what i wrote in the original post. Paul says wolves will rise up among the faithful and seek to take men out of the Church and unto themselves by preaching “perverse things”. This establishes (a) there is a Chruch to be taken out of, (b) they will do it for their own aggrandizement (Nicolatians, Donatists, Lutherans, Weslyens, etc) and (c) we can only identify what is perverse and what is true by (i) the scripture, (ii) the Church which as we saw in Acts 15 has authority to interpret scripture and (iii) tradition by knowing how a scripture was interpreted in the 1st century, the 5th, the 10th, etc we can know how to interpret it now. You rejection of the evidence of the Chruch fathers is at best naive and at worst arrogant willful blindness. I can get you rejecting the Church but when I show you 1/2 a dozen men from the first 2 centuries talking about the Christian belief in the real presence it takes a phenomenal amount of hubris to think that all of them were completely wrong, that the Holy Spirit never guided them,and that the Holy Spirit has revealed to you and similar minded people what no one believed for the first 1500 years of Christianity.

      11. Finally, it would be helpful if you stopped arguing against what you have been told Catholics believe, what you think Catholics believe and against stereotypes.

      Anyway, I’ll let you have the last word. We will keep analyzing the issues as we come across new passages.

      • Jon musso says:

        You just don’t like scripture you guys attacked me on this thread all year Im done Im standing for truth. There no such things as good works when it comes to salvation. What did you think you were going to get from a evangelical pastor. Some one who was going to just agree. You guy have been throwing punches at me all through out this thread at some level even jesus turn over the tables. Have a good day.

  12. Jon musso says:

    Romans 4:5 another good one. That Paul just will not stop paul certainly catholic it’s all over these scriptures!

    • Jon musso says:

      Everyone of those passage support justification through faith alone that the point of Paul letter.

      • Jon musso says:

        Do me a favor remove me from your thread and have a good life.

      • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

        James 2:14-26New American Standard Bible (NASB)

        Faith and Works

        14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can [a]that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, [b]be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is [c]dead, being by itself.

        18 But someone [d]may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” 19 You believe that [e]God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that faith was working with his works, and [f]as a result of the works, faith was [g]perfected; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

  13. Jon musso says:

    John McCartha said it the best it better to hang out with a drunk in a bar than some one who teaches a false religion!

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      We see who is leading the flock away from the Truth. You, Jon. You have had to apologize multiple times and you’re forgiven without asking. Peace be with your Spirit.

  14. Jon musso says:

    Listen your not even a knowledgeable catholic! Dave at least a knowledgeable catholic. Hey I think you may want to pay a priest so you can get out of pergatory!

    • Justin (Ignatius of Loyola) says:

      Dave VT is as credible as the One True Church we both follow. Dave knows more than I do. That admission is called humility. I’m learning from him as a layman and also from others who have passed down knowledge through the centuries. All founded in Scripture, all without error. Consider Dave VT as being St. Paul and me being St. Luke. Walk with us, Jon. We all have to work for better understanding and full acceptance of the Truth.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s