Mfw Cathocucks trying to reach salvation through works

You can see how protestants run a slippery slope when it comes to self betterment while Catholics require self betterment. And bare in mind "betterment" doesn't extroverted mean outsocial work. It could be introverted like asceticism.

How so?
He still felt the Catholic Church was derailing salvation by excluding the (even educated) laity from theological debate, using broad interpretations of the Bible to justify self-serving forms of laity repentance; and feeling like it had power to determine how secular states should conduct government, while rejecting any idea of the state resist the influence and power of the church through any system of checks and balances, despite God also anointing the Christian nobility to rule at their respective posts.

He truly felt that the Catholic church had become despicable.

Justification is the article upon which the church stands or falls

>He truly felt that the Catholic church had become despicable.
It had become corrupt. Even from a Catholic perspective his rebellion kickstarted the catholic restoration which preserved the church for another several centuries. Luther can be regarded as a necessary evil. Although I'd personally take his changes in a much different direction.

>thought veneration of her should continue
That's false though, he opposed veneration

Praying the rosary is veneration. He obvious was a hypocrite than as if what you say is true he would have been venerating her while advising not to.

He prayed the parts of the rosary which were not to Mary. He didn't pray to Mary anymore.

He would still feel that the church is despicable. Primarily because of the church excluding the educated laity from theological debate, despite their souls also being at stake.

He would also detest the idea that the Pope is guided by the Holy Spirit, and is infallible in matters of faith; thus allowing him to establish new religious traditions on equal footing of importance as scripture, which Catholics claim is merely a product of tradition itself.

>Yeah, who even thinks the Bible is the word of God LMAO
The Bible is the word of man, but has been approved of by the Holy Spirit as "good enough" for transmitting the path to salvation.

Yes, he's a Catholic friar, and has Catholic ideologies.

I can't believe you studied the man very seriously if you are not aware of that simple fact.

Nor can your "study" of scripture be very deep:

Ephesians 2
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Romans 4
Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.”

Romans 10
For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

All those who have faith are justified, all those who are justified are sanctified, all those who are sanctified have works
What part of this do you not understand?

The part where you added "all those who are sanctified have works" that is not in the bible.

James 2:14-26

You're basically a pharisee who thinks your works can impress God.

You haven't thought it through very much.

What do your great works do for God again?

Not an argument

You can explain that if you'd like.

Then you can explain why you're using that text in the context of salvation.

Then you can explain why you want to be Judaized by James instead of saved by Jesus.

Bonus points for realizing that James never thought, nor cared, that Gentiles could be saved, and merely told Paul that Gentiles could go to the synagogue to learn of the Law of Moses, if they were interested in the things of God.

Jesus' half brother was an unbelieving asshole; Jesus did not even trust him to take care of their mother.

Why he's the linchpin for your absurd salvation by works mantra is ponderous.

Just the truth.

Ever notice Jesus just lays out the truth, and moves on?

The rosary is overwhelmingly to the Vrigin Mary. You can't pray "just the parts" that aren't to Mary.

Pharisees didn't think works would impress God, they thought autistically following 613 commandments to the letter while being hypocritical when it comes to love, mercy and God is how you got into heaven.

If anything protestants with their "sola scruptura" are closest to pharisism.

>Then you can explain why you're using that text in the context of salvation
Verse 14 says "Can that faith save him?"
>Judaized by James
Is the Epistle of James inspired scripture?
>James never thought, nor cared, that Gentiles could be saved, and merely told Paul that Gentiles could go to the synagogue to learn of the Law of Moses, if they were interested in the things of God
Have you ever read Acts 15?
>salvation by works
Salvation is by grace, not of works, lest any man should boast.

It pre-existed Mary by 2000 years.

I thought the bible was the word of God?

Yes, they thought that by keeping the Law, they were righteous in the eyes of God.

Jesus told them they failed.

They murdered him, proving he was correct.

It has prayers that do not even mention Mary
>they thought autistically following 613 commandments to the letter while being hypocritical when it comes to love, mercy and God is how you got into heaven.
No, that is not at all what they thought.
>If anything protestants with their "sola scruptura" are closest to pharisism
Pharisaism directly contradicts sola scriptura

>Verse 14 says "Can that faith save him?"

A faith that does not have works flowing through love is a COUNTERFEIT faith, and will not save a man, no.

James and Paul are not using "faith" in the same manner. Paul uses "faith" as "saving faith in Christ Jesus", where James uses "faith" as "faith in anything".

Your argument with James is faith without works is dead.

My point is that salvation is by grace, and it is a gift.

Not the wages of work. My paycheck is not a gift to me. I earned it. It's mine.

You demonstrate my point, not yours.

But it involves meditating on Mary's life and 14-164 prayers to Mary. And that's just the modern version. The old version had even more.

Luther prayed to Mary, loved Mary and wanted Virgin Mary veneration to continue. This is documented.

It is. Your understanding of it is shallow and pedantic.

>No, that is not at all what they thought.
That's exactly what they thought. But if you have any reason to think otherwise spit it out.

Pharisees followed Judaism by works.

Catholics follow (nothing) by works they merely practice idolatry and other pagan rites and rituals that predate Roman Catholicism by 2000 years.

>A faith that does not have works flowing through love is a COUNTERFEIT faith, and will not save a man, no.
So, in other words, all those who are sanctified have works?
>You demonstrate my point, not yours
I said this

As is Luther's status as a lost and virulently anti-semetic Catholic friar.

>lost
Do not think to know the hearts of men
>anti-semetic
Completely irrelevant to his standing before God
>Catholic friar
Not for long he wasn't

No, all who are sanctified are PREPARED for good works; they do not HAVE them.

Stick to the bible.

2 Timothy 2:21 Therefore if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful for the Master, prepared for every good work.

1 Corinthians 3:15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

So then this >A faith that does not have works flowing through love is a COUNTERFEIT faith, and will not save a man
Is wrong?

You can judge people by their fruits.

No Luther, no Hitler.

Jesus is a Jew; Martin Luther hates Jews. Directly has something to do with the lost nature of all anti-semetic catholics, Luther in particular. Perhaps you never read the vile "On the Jews and Their Lies". It's quoted half a dozen times in Mein Kampf.

A REAL faith can produce NO WORKS AT ALL, yet still save a man because salvation is by GRACE and is a GIFT of GOD.

Imagine me poking you in the sternum as hard as I can at each capitalized word.

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23 For if a man be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he shall be compared to a man beholding his own countenance in a glass.
24 For he beheld himself, and went his way, and presently forgot what manner of man he was.
25 But he that hath looked into the perfect law of liberty, and hath continued therein, not becoming a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work; this man shall be blessed in his deed.
26 And if any man think himself to be religious, not bridling his tongue, but deceiving his own heart, this man's religion is vain.
27 Religion clean and undefiled before God and the Father, is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their tribulation: and to keep one's self unspotted from this world.

Knowing an out loud confession that Jesus is Lord, and knowing that you must believe in your heart God raised him from the dead is just knowledge. Not salvation.

Saying out loud that Jesus is Lord, and believing in your heart God raised him from the dead is salvation.

The gap between knowing and doing is infinite.

>Jesus is a Jew
Jesus was a Christian who was opposed to the sect which would give birth to rabbinical Judaism (pharisaism).

8 A double minded man is inconstant in all his ways.

Seed of Abraham.
Root of David.
Lion of the Tribe of Judah.
King of the Jews.

Which of those indicate Jesus is not a Jew?

Is Buddha a buddhist?

Yes, you cannot half ass work out your spiritual life and half ass try to build a secular life or you will get nowhere with either.

Anyone could have told you that.

>No Luther, no Hitler.
Is your righteousness any better?
>Directly has something to do with the lost nature of all anti-semetic catholics
The Jews are Christkillers and the enemies of God, they are loathsome in His sight.
So yes, that was wrong? Was James wrong?

>Is Buddha a buddhist?
Of course he is. He laid out the path of Buddhism for his followers. He wasn't a Hindu. Same with Jesus. He wasn't a Jew. He was a Christian.

As for those titles, Christian's believe they never were exclusively for Hebrew people OR that they were only for a little while to prepare the way for God's son Jesus Christ.

Spiritually I'm just as much a decendent of Abraham as some rabbi.

My righteousness is infinitely better than Luther's or Hitler's, as it is Jesus' righteousness imputed to me.

You hate Jews, which ironically will have you spending eternity with the worst Jews in hell.

No, Buddha is not a buddhist and Jesus is not a Christian.

Buddha is the teacher buddhists follow, and Jesus is the God Christians are brothers, sisters, and mothers to.

@2535636
>He's easily the superior of Augustine

You don't deserve a (You)

>It's a "butthurt Catholics justify their corruption" thread

Go practice simony somewhere else

And necromancy, and idolatry, and magic, and paganism in general.

>My righteousness is infinitely better than Luther's or Hitler's, as it is Jesus' righteousness imputed to me
And Luther had this righteousness too. If Hitler repented at the end, he too will be saved.
>You hate Jews
I do not
>which ironically will have you spending eternity with the worst Jews in hell
Heed the Lord's warning in Matthew 7:1-2 or you will join your precious Christkillers

Not by the fruits of his labor he did not. Neither did Hitler repent; if you haven't noticed, antichrist rulers do not repent at the end.

I will never be in hell with you because I know something you do not know.

Nobody killed Jesus.

>Buddha is not a buddhist
What? First of "Buddha" is a title. Similar to the fact that Christ is a title. Of course Siddhartha is a Buddhist. He's the original Buddhist. Siddhartha practiced what he preached just as Christ practiced what he preached.

Well do you represent Peter, called Satan, when he told Jesus not to go to Jerusalem to die.

Well are you satan's child.

He cannot be a buddhist because he invented the religion. Buddhists are people who generally follow his teachings.

Is English your first language?

Was the murder of Jesus a sin?

Got it backwards m8

You have to split "murder in their hearts" which was one of their many sins and the cause of their blood libel for a few generations with the impossibility of murdering Jesus.

As in all things Catholic, no, the Catholic got everything backwards.

Do you think the death of our Lord was a suicide?

History says otherwise.

Yes.

Jesuit history, perhaps.

That's blasphemy. Jesus was not a sinner.

Except I have no evidence he is your Lord.

All history except the delusional revisions of Protestants.

>He cannot be a buddhist because he invented the religion
Was John smith a Mormon? Was Abraham a Jew? Was muhamed a Muslim? Answer all.

>you got it all backwards
>Those child molestations and church corruption never happened

This is good bread lads, keep it going.

>Protestants have a worse record of sex abuse

Might want to try a different argument buddy.

>>Protestants have a worse record of sex abuse
>[citation needed]

No pope covered it up
He is

And neither was his laying down his life as payment for humanity's sins a sin.

He came to die. If you want to call that "suicide", there's no way around it. Jesus did not die until he released his spirit, and had Jesus wanted to, he would still be on that cross today.

Nobody kills God.

So only Jesuit history.

christiancentury.org/article/2013-10/evangelicals-worse-catholics-sexual-abuse

One man's crime doesn't implicate the whole church.

I don't know any John Smith, but Joe Smith was not a Mormon, no. Abraham was not a Jew, no. Mohammad was not a muslim, no.

Seriously, what is your primary language?

Please feel free to share your Christian testimony here, on how you became a born again Christian.

>No pope covered it up

No, they just cover it up themselves.

Nobody is worse than the Catholics; they don't even turn over their pedophiles to the police. They hide them.

>One man's crime doesn't implicate the whole church
The pope is the church

No.

>Nobody is worse than the Catholics

Except the Protestants.

>Liberty University law professor and grandson of Billy Graham has told reporters that he thinks evangelicals are worse than Catholics
>he thinks
>Source: Mea anus

Reality agrees.

Sorry you love Satan.

Faith without works is dead. James 2:26

I suspect you know it is not the testimony of a Christian, but then you and I both know you're not a Christian at all, don't we.

Matthew 25
“Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us!’ But he answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.’

Justification is by faith alone but not a faith that is alone

Nobody. Not even satan worshipers.

Get saved first. Protip: It has nothing to do with your works under the Law.

Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.