- Yes 11 (23%)
- No 33 (70%)
- Don't know 3 (6%)
Comment
"Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14).
29 April 2009
Poll - April 2009
Can anyone see the Lord without holiness?
Comment
"Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14).
Comment
"Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
How could you as a "christian" of today aspire to be holy by obeying God's Will and Commandments when and if you belong to a congregation/church that teaches the opposite by quoting the same Bible as you have on issues of gay-marriage, stem cell-cloning and others to justify their theology?
How would you know the calling of Jesus when your church and pastor teaches the opposite side?
Today, the secular ideologies are creeping in Christian Churches and sadly one by one are falling to the relentless pressure.
Protestant churches are changing their interpretation of the Bible regarding these issues just to quote from Today's News:
"....a clash between churches themselves. Most recently, the Anglican and Episcopal Communion as well as Lutherans have been paralyzed by debate over the consecration of gay bishops.
Rev. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary "No issue defines our current cultural crisis as clearly as homosexuality. Some churches and denominations have capitulated to the demands of the homosexual rights movement, and now accept homosexuality as a fully valid lifestyle," he wrote. "Other denominations are tottering on the brink, and without a massive conservative resistance, they are almost certain to abandon biblical truth and bless what the Bible condemns. Within a few short years, a major dividing line has become evident — with those churches endorsing homosexuality on one side, and those stubbornly resisting the cultural tide on the other."
Whose Church has the Authority to speak for Christ? How would you know with certainty?
You can not say the Bible because these christian pastors and churches would also use it to oppose your interpretation and besides Bible does not say anything about genetic DNA manipulation, stem-cell or cloning etc.
If there exist offenses, disputes and disagreements, Jesus told us go to His Church (not the Bible) to settle and let the Church pass the FINAL judgement once and for all. Look in Matthew 18:15.
There is only ONE Church (not churchES) that Christ Jesus gave his authority and marks for us to know:
One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.
Seek and you shall find!
The christians and their pastors who are for gay-marriage, contraception and the likes are very serious and we should not doubt their sincerity to be holy and follow God's will.
They are bible believing people who truly believes and professes that Holy Scripture embraces all people regardless of their "actions" and because of this they believe the other side are intolerant and Jesus wouldn't agree with.
This is the problem when emotions, feelings and one's own interpretation based their truth as true. (2 Peter 1:20)
Without the real Truth how could one be holy?
Hebrews 12:14 "....to be holy"
The real question is how? it is easier said than done.
A very wise counsel from the holy monks I encountered is that you put yourself in the presence of the Lord always in any situation and look at the person next to you as if Christ himself and everything else will follow.
However, I agree with anonymous that the truth should be revealed first and made known so that we can't be mislead in doing stuff we think are righteous and holy.
This is where the necessity of the Church as infallible guardian-interpreter of an infallible Scripture comes in.
Blessings!
Why do you guys are trying to reason with Joe Mizzi?
This guy has choosen to close his world and looks at any thing with his protestant eye-lenses.
He claimed he was being faithful to the Word of God (Bible) and rejects the authority of the Church which Jesus gave. By doing so he had no idea that he is being unfaithful to the Bible which he cherishes.
Let the guy live with Luther, Calvin, James White and the likes.
"Not One but divisions"
Jae,
Are you saying:
By being disobedient to the authority that God established on earth which is the Church, is the same as they and by themselves established their own authority ouside of God's under the pretext of being obedient to God's Word.
Romans 13:1-2
"Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves."
Comment: This passage should be frightening to those who do not submit to the Authority of the Church. When Christ founded the Church and commissioned its leaders, he granted them the authority necessary to fulfill its mission.
Some more: Hebrews 13:17, 1 Timothy 3:15, Ephesians 3:4-6.
Makes a lot of sense!
ATTENTION: MR. JOE MIZZI
ATTENTION: MR. JOE MIZZI
A frightening look at the demographic trends that will produce a MUSLIM EUROPE by just 30 to 39 years from now. It's already too late to change course.
Watch the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK1pnCldKZI
"Muslim Demographics: The Islamic Tidal Wave"
Please Joe save and re-direct all your energy to evangelize non-christians and even to the Muslims of your own backyard - Europe.
Stop your hatred towards catholics and let's do some hard work together to proclaim the Gospel to post-christian Europe.
May God have mercy on us!
I'm backkk! Glory to God!
Mr. Joe Mizzi quoted this verse
from Hebrews 12:14 about being holy and thus we will see the Lord but at the same time it actually proves that our cooperation/good works is necessary for salvation.
"Make EVERY EFFORT to live in peace with all men AND TO BE holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14)
If you look at the verse carefully, “MAKE EVERY EFFORT”..... TO BE holy”, this was addressed to believers in Christ Jesus and emphasized that we need to do our part as men with free will and cooperate with the grace given by God through good works “to be holy”. What does it mean “to be holy ?” it means to make an effort to achieve the state of holiness with God’s grace.
Unless you cooperate and strive(human acts) “to be holy” with God’s grace the consequence is very severe...we “will not see the Lord”, which also means you would not be save at all.
One could easily overlook the urgent message of this verse on the importance of our works of love with God’s grace of faith to achieve holiness. If you also look at these verses (Gal. 5:4-6: Matt 7:20; James 2:14-18,1 Cor 15:58 Heb 6:10, Col 3:23-24).
The Catholic teaching on “Faith Working Through Love” (Gal. 5:4-6) is the only biblical explanation and not by “faith ALONE” which is clearly condemned in the Bible. (James 2:24).
Very clear, I just hope Joe got the message of this verse from Hebrews.
Brother Joe,
When you wrote something about sacred images and somehow you found out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches worship of Christ images/icons, I beg to disagree.
The CCC is very clear:
“The honour paid to sacred images is a “respectful veneration,” not the adoration due to God alone: Religious worship is NOT directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images LEADING us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does NOT TERMINATE in it as image, but tends TOWARDS that whose image it is.”
You then made a conclusion:
"The same sentence continues to affirm that religious worship is directed to images “under their distinctive aspect as images”. Thus, according to the Catechism, images of God incarnate are worshipped."
The problem with your analysis and conclusion (not personal, i hope you are not offended) is that you assumed the worship given to God terminates under the aspect of images and then you suddenly cut-off. The word after that is “LEADING” and the word before that is "NOT DIRECTED". In other words, the worship is directed to God and not the images in themselves but LEADING US ONLY to God. Very clear.
In the books of Exodus and Leviticus, Moses spoke the words of God and the jews flocked and followed him in whatever he says eventhough they had the Torah (written words).
They always see Moses as inspiring them to look towards God because he has the word of God but never worship him but only to “LEAD” them to God.
The same analogy, sacred images/icons inspire us to be reverent and look for the heavenly but never worship by themselves only to “LEAD” (inspire/remind) us to God.
Did you read about how the Israelites gave the utmost honor and reverence to the Ark of the Covenant (images in themselves)whenever it was displayed in public or in the temple and how God demanded such homage from His people?
Now in terms of the portrait/picture of your wife, if you commissioned a painter to paint a portrait of your wife and gave it to her as a gift, what would you think of her reactions? Do you think she will not accept it and throw it back to you because it is not the EXACT REPLICA of her? Do you think she will comment about the color of her hair in the portrait? Or the eyebrows is a little bit straight or the cheeks is a bit cheeky?
OR do you think she (your wife) will tremendously be happy and appreciate your loving and good intentions eventhough the painting is not EXACTLY her’s.
We always say, “it is not the gift but the thought that counts”.
Now, do you think God knows that inspite of our human limitations we can not EXACTLY REPLICATE His image but the effort and intentions we made because we love Him so much and the desire to “see” Him in His “portrait” to inspire and remind us of Him, would you think He will hold it against us? No, in fact, He is truly honored when we do just that. (same as the picture of your loved ones in your wallet or the Ark of OT.)
With regards to the quotation of St. Thomas with the CCC, I guessed the previous post from Mark or Anonymous answered your objection adequately.
Now, regarding bowing in front of images/icons or we could say the same as bowing in front of your fiancée for engagement or bowing to the Queen of England for Knighthood or bowing in front of your Bible in reverence, do you think people who do these things are idol worshippers?
Think again.
Very well said, Luther.
I think Joe is trying to drive at is the word, "UNDER" their distinctive aspect of images."
Well aside from the fact the CCC categorically put the words before and after the word "under" which are "not directed" and "leading", let's set them aside to grant Joe some wiggle room.
The word "under" in the CCC which according Joe shows of Catholic idolatry "albeit in a rather obscure way."
Let's use the old reliable dictionary and find out:
UNDER : 1. beneath or covered by.
So applying that meaning to Joe's interpretation:
The religious worship being done "beneath or covered by" the images is directed towards the images by themselves.
Whatever combination you have it will be the same.
Does it sound reasonable to you? does it make sense at all?
Do you think there is a circular and very flawed logic exist?
Mark,
I got your point and thanks.
Who's the person the image is "covering by"? or who's "beneath" the mere image on the paper or stone?
Is it referring to, pointing to and going back to the same image and not which it is supposed to "cover by"?
Hmmmm.
No offense intended to Joe but the only article he wrote I agree with is about the Deity of Christ, ok also Holy Trinity, and the rest are saturated with errors.
Joe is a man of science (he's a doctor) so am I (math) but his logical thinking in my opinion is being clouded by prejudice.
James,
It's a good thing you noticed the "real" message of the verse from Hebrews 12:14, "Make every effort..to be holy; without...you will not see the Lord".
I've like to add some more:
"STRIVE to enter by the arrow gate for many I say will try and not be able!" Lk. 13:24 (JESUS Himself is telling you to MAKE EVERY EFFORT to enter into eternal life, for many will try and not make it! The pastors are telling you just the opposite...make NO effort! Who are you going to believe?)
"Let us therefore be "DILIGENT to enter that rest, lest anyone fall after the same example of disobedience." Heb. 4:11 (The context of this passage is a warning and admonition to again "Make every effort". There are MANY such passages in Hebrews issuing similar warnings.)
Joe, Joe, Joe....why are you guys trying to separate faith and love? why again the "either/or" mentality? why?
"You can have ALL the FAITH to move mountains, but WITHOUT LOVE (good works) you will be NOTHING". (1 Cor 13:2)
What does it mean to be NOTHING? Are you saved or not?
"Right now three things remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is LOVE" (1 Cor 13:13).
The GREATEST IS LOVE (good works/charity).
Do you get it, Joe MIzzi?
"..at the end we will be judge ON Love."
I pray that you will open your eyes to the "love" of Jesus.
This is a very profound verse from the Bible:
"..if I have all faith so that I can remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.(KJV 1 Cor 13:2).
"faith working through love" (Gal 5:4ff).
Thanks and God Bless!
Just a few comments on Joe Mizzi's JUSTIFICATION:
JOE MIZZI: “Moreover Paul could not have limited the concept of ‘works of the Law’ to the Torah…In this context ‘works’ could not refer exclusively to obedience of the Torah, for Abraham lived many centuries before Moses. It is therefore wrong to force Paul’s concept of ‘works of the Law’ exclusively to the Law of Moses.
In this context ‘works’ could not refer exclusively to obedience of the Torah, for Abraham lived many centuries before Moses. It is therefore wrong to force Paul’s concept of ‘works of the Law’ exclusively to the Law of Moses. Clearly Paul applies the same principle to works in general."(Romans 4:1-5).
COMMENT: Joe is at least half-way correct. Paul is not saying that only the Mosaic law is the excluded work. Paul says "works of law," not Mosaic law. This means that any work which comes from a legal system, cannot justify a man. That's why Paul can include "works of his own righteousness" in Titus 3:5; and works of the moral law in Romans 7:7-8; as works which will not justify a man, because both are legal entities. The Council of Trent recognized the same thing. It never referred to only the Mosaic law as that which cannot justify.
The problem is the failure to understand the KIND of works that cannot be used for justification. Paul is clear in Romans 4:4 that "works of debt," which are works done prior to faith, are non-salvific, since he already told us that works done in faith and repentance to God are salvific in Romans 2:6-7, 13.
The argument in Romans 4 is not that circumcision is not salvific, but that faith must come before circumcision. In other words, if Abraham had been circumcised without faith, there would be no justification for him. As Trent says in Ch 8, "faith is the root of all justification." Faith must be behind every work in order for the work to be considered a work of grace. Otherwise, the work is a work of debt. By the same token, if after he exhibited faith Abraham refused to circumcise, then he would have been condemned (lost his justification), which is clear from Genesis 17:14. This is the very reason Paul mentions David in the same context of Romans 4, since after his sin with Bathsheba, David lost his justification. It was restored when he repented of his sin.
Everyone is saved like Abraham, but what is missing is that Romans 4:9-22 says that faith must come prior to works, not that faith alone justifies. If someone tries to work without faith in God, then he is in the system of debt. Works, by themselves, will always put someone in the system of debt, and in that system, the law will always condemn him, since the law demands perfection, not repentance.
The words "faith alone" are never used by Paul in Romans 4, or anywhere. In fact, Paul used the word "alone" four times in Romans 3-4 (Romans 3:29; 4:12; 4:16; 4:23), so obviously he knew what the word "alone" meant and what it could do for his argument if he wanted to teach the concept of "faith alone," yet he never coupled "alone" with the word "faith." A devastating lacuna for the Protestant to answer.
JOE MIZZI: How does the Pope resolve the contradiction between Paul’s teaching and Catholic doctrine? Didn’t Paul clearly state that ‘we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law’? (Romans 3:28).
COMMENT: Where does Paul use the words "faith alone?" Granted, he says, "a man is justified by faith apart from works of law" in Romans 3:28, but that does not mean "faith alone." It only means that "works of law" are excluded from faith, not works of some other sort. In the same way that Protestants have a perennial problem in concluding that every mention of "faith" means "faith alone," they have a similar problem when they conclude that every mention of "works" is non-salvific.
Here is the great mistake of John Calvin. He assumes that "faith alone" is the same thing as "faith apart from works of law." That is absolutely false. "Faith alone" means that NOTHING can be added to faith for justification.
"Faith apart from works of law" only means that "works of law" cannot be added to faith for justification. Paul does not say "Faith apart from love" or "Faith apart from hope," since love and hope are under God's grace. "Works of law" are further explained by Paul in Romans 4:4 as works of legal debt, works upon which someone boasts and expects payment or strict merit. But Paul does not put the works of Romans 2:4-13 into this category, nor the works of Romans 14:10-12, or those of 1 Cor. 3:12-17; 2 Corinthians 5:10; or any number of passages which speak about works determining our salvation.
Paul does the same in Titus 3:5 when he says "He saved us not on the basis of deed which we have done." But Catholicism has been crystal clear on this. Read Canon 1 of Trent. It says that ANY work done by man cannot merit the grace of Justification. But unlike JOe, Trent also knows that Scripture speaks of works that DO justify (Romans 2:6-13). Obviously, then, we must make a distinction between the kind of works that justify and the kind of works that don't justify. The simplest way to describe this distinction is to refer to the one as works of grace and to the other as works of debt, after Paul's terminology in Romans 4:4. If not, then all the rest of Protestantism will be stuck trying to understand Romans 2:6-13 where Paul says that good works and obedience to the law justifies a man.
Titus 3:5 is a contrast between works devoid of Christ and works we perform in Christ. As Trent said "his own works" (which is the same as Titus 3:5's words "his own works of righteousness"), do not merit the grace of justification, for they are not in Christ. In Titus 3:5, the work we perform in Christ is submitting to the "washing of regeneration," which even Protestants agree refers to Baptism. Since Baptism is a work of grace, not a work of debt, then it is not classified as "his own works" or "his own works of righteousness."
The issue is "merit." Can our works merit, in the STRICT sense of the word, justification? The answer is clearly NO, since if they could merit justification, then justification would not be of grace (Romans 11:6). But when we do works of grace in Christ, we are not claiming to strictly merit anything. Whatever we receive for doing those works is based on grace, and the even the power to do the works comes only from grace. Unless Joe begins to understand the difference between legal works that merit legal payment as opposed to non-legal works which cannot demand payment but are rewarded by grace, then he will always misunderstand, and falsely malign, the Catholic position.
JOE MIZZI: In Paul’s teaching, we are not justified on account of any personal works, but by faith; good works follow after faith and justification.
COMMENT: False. There is no Scripture verse which says that faith results in works. This is the major fallacy of Protestant thought. Rather, works must be consciously and consistently added to faith by an act of the will. This principle is precisely why Abraham fell into some disbelief and bad works in Genesis 16 when he took Hagar as a wife, and in Genesis 17 when he laughed at the promise of God.
The idea that once the button of faith is pushed the conveyor belt of works will automatically start running. Faith does not inevitably produce good works. Faith only gives one a better disposition to do works. The whole book of James addresses the issue of Christians who have faith but are not producing the works they should. Read especially James 3-4, not to mention their despising of the poor man in both 2:1-5 and 2:15-16 after it is said that they have faith in James 2:1.
Protestants mistakenly regard the addition of works to faith as if the only effect of the works is for the purpose of qualifying the faith so that the faith, alone, can save; rather than seeing that salvation is procured only when faith and works act together. That is a crucial distinction. The reason they make this mistake is that they come to the text with a presupposition that faith alone justifies (which teaching they mistakenly believe to acquire from Paul). Hence, since to them faith is the only thing that justifies, then works can only act as the qualifier of the type of faith needed for justification. But James puts no such qualifiers on faith.
JOE MIZZI: If the Jew could not be justified by the works of the perfect Law, no-one could be justified by the works of any law. After all did not the Gentiles, though ignorant of Moses, also have ‘the law written in their hearts’ (Romans 2:14)? Yet they too were unable to be justified by works.
Yes, it is the whole law, but it is the whole law under the system of law, not grace. The system of law is a system of debt, wherein someone demands legal payment for the work they have done. But that is not the kind of works Paul requires for justification in Romans 2:4-16, the very passage Calvin and his followers dismissed as "hypothetical" and as not having any salvific import. Catholicism sees no contradiction between Romans 2 and Romans 3-4, since it makes the proper distinction between works of grace and works of debt. This crucial distinction was taught by Thomas Aquinas in his categories of STRICT merit in opposition to CONDIGN or CONGRUENT merit, a distinction with which Calvin was familiar, but refused to admit into his theology, since he was bent on destroying the Catholic Church. It is the same distinction that today's would-be critiques of Catholicism fail to make, and therefore, perpetuate the myth about "works" in Catholicism. If they would read the Council of Trent very closely, they would see that such is not the case.
Anonymous, this is what I call the Catholic Church's theology on justification that are found in the Council of Trent, truly Biblical.
Thanks for posting it up.
Thanks for Mark and Luther for the defintion of the word "under" (images)which Mr. Mizzi had a problem with.
Very clear and informative.
God Bless!
HELLO: MR. MIZZI
HELLO: MR. MIZZI
HELLO: MR. MIZZI
HELLO: MR. MIZZI
1. Did you read the postings of Luther and Mark about your problem with "under" in "worshipping images"?
2. Did you read the post above from anonymous on true Catholic doctrine on justification?
3. Did you read from 2000 year old catholic (Blood of His Cross) about how our fastings, prayers, self-sacrifice etc. being as penances for satisfaction of our sins and not in anyway contradict Christ's atonement? that they are biblical and your interpretation is not?
4. Did you read from James about the message of Hebrews 12:14 you quoted? And anonymous of having all the faith is nothing without love (good works)?
5. Did you read from Mark about Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant?If you believe Jesus is King then what makes His Mother? Common sense, my friend.
6. Do you have anything to say? defend your interpretation and your doctrines you got from Calvin.
The problem with you Mr. Mizzi is when you started accusing the Catholic Teaching as poison but who is the real poison now?
So before you drink yours be very sure....read the Bible again with a "childlike" heart.
Guys on the lighter side of things these quotes collected from Mark Shea's website they’d gotten over the years from anti-Catholics writing (and re-writing and re-writing) in “Christian love”. Some of the choicer bits included:
WARNING: These are hilarious, LOL!
1. When I converted to Catholicism, it was the statue worship that appealed to me the most, but banner worship has its appeal as well. Historians have been able to show that pagans also worshipped primitive banners so either one has authentic Catholic-pagan connections.
2.I also liked that I didn’t have to read the Bible any more and that I would have to earn my way to Heaven. Besides that, I really appreciated the fact that I could check my brain at the door and blindly follow the leaders.
3. A really cool part of Catholicism is that now I can commit all of my favorite sins and then go to Confession right before I go out and do them again!! Actually, while I was Protestant, I guess I did that too, but without the Confession part. But sitting in that little room just feels so holy, especially with the statues nearby.
4. The cannibalism aspect, I have to admit, grosses me out a little, but I comfort myself by knowing that it is a false doctrine anyway and so it is only really bread.
This cracked me up and I replied :
5. I know exactly how you feel. For me, it’s the chance to worship Mary and adore her as the Creator of Almighty God that is so appealing. And, of course, I really love knowing that salvation is completely up to me and my righteousness apart from the grace of God. Also, the deep pride I feel in the Church’s many Inquisitors, cold-blooded killers, persecutors, perverts and criminals was a big draw. Some people think this is a problem, but I frankly have no idea what they are talking about. I am aware of no commands of God against these things because, of course, I never read the Bible.
6. Which reminds me: I just love adding absurd human traditions, myths and legends to the pure word of God. Also, I get a real kick out of enslaving myself to little rules and regulations so as to chain myself with fear and cut myself off from the love of God.
7. I like the fact that I don’t have to really talk to God- I can just repeat prayers by rote thousands of times over to earn my way to heaven.
8. It’s also cool that I can have a man forgive my sins- I don’t even have to ask God!
9. I especially like the vain repetitious prayers of the Rosary and the sacrilegious practice of calling priests “Father.”
10. But for me, the best thing about being a Catholic is calling the Holy Father “Lord God the Pope” and worshipping him. That and being able to acknowledge Mary as the Fourth Member of the Trinity. You have no idea what a drag it was worshipping that all-male God of Evangelicalism!
11.I can’t get over the sense of history, what with all the witch-burnings, Crusades, Inquisitions and pox-carrying missionaries to celebrate.
12. Being a part of the corporate machine that sells salvation is the biggest reward for me. Especially since I get such a big cut of the profits.
13. Hopefully our next Pope will start another cold-blooded massacre like the Inquisition or the Crusades, and I can earn my justification based on my “score” of how many Protestants or Muslims I kill. I’ll “stand before God” … ATOP A PILE OF SKULLS!
14. I like the new church the Masons invented for us in 1962.
15. Where else can a poor girl like me hope to grow up to be a saint and be worshiped by millions?
If you’re an ignorant benighted Catholic like me, feel free to add your favorite spiritually crippling legend, lie, or practice to the pool. The more the merrier!
Some more on Mark Shea's website!
Post a Comment