One Year of blogging

I just realized that yesterday was my one-year anniversary of beginning this blog. I've learned alot this year. I wonder what the next year will bring.

More discussion on John 6

Elena (of mydomesticchurch.com) and I were having a discussion here
about my 'I am the Bread of Life' (John 6) post. Following are two comments I made at the end of our discussion to clarify why this subject is so important.

The reason I keep stressing that Jesus is talking about His actual sacrifice on the cross, and about believing His word by faith, is that this is how the bible teaches that we are saved: by faith in Christ's sacrifice to take away our sin, which brings repentance and rebirth and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Another thing that concerns me about Catholics besides that many are trusting in outward things for salvation (such as sacraments) is that they don't believe in or have assurance of salvation which comes by faith in Christ after we become a new creature by the indwelling of the Spirit who regenerates us and washes us by Christ's blood.

1 John 5:13
13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, THAT YOU MAY KNOW THAT YOU HAVE ETERNAL LIFE, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Thy Word is Truth

John 17:17
Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.


I read this post at historicalchristian.com today, in which Aimee Cooper posted a news article about her class, Understanding the Catholic Gospel, where she is quoted comparing the catholic gospel to what she calls 'the protestant gospel.' Again, she horribly misrepresents the 'protestant gospel.' She seems deliberately to be using the worst caricatured stereotypes about protestant teaching, which completely misses the richness and simplicity and beauty of the biblical gospel, which bible-believers teach and love.
She states the falsehood that believers are sanctified by the sacrament of the eucharist, instead of by the Holy Spirit working through the truth of God's word as we abide in Christ (See John 15):

“The Catholic Gospel is based on sacramental theology,” explained Cooper. “In the Eucharist, which we believe is the body and blood of Christ … we experience union with God here on earth, which is both physical and spiritual. It’s sacramental theology—it’s infused grace, which is different from Protestant imputed grace, which is only external.”

See my post on 'I Am The Bread of Life' for more on why believing in Jesus is how we 'eat His flesh and drink His blood', not taking the eucharist, which is a symbol and a remembrance of His sacrfice for us.
Aimee says that the Eucharist is what sanctifies catholics:

“He actually lives and grows in us. We are meant to be changed into Christ in our lifetimes,” Cooper said. “It’s what the early Christians believed in the beginning and what the Church has always believed. The Eucharist was the center of life for the early Christians—they protected it, they celebrated it. It’s what changed them and gave them power to witness, to evangelize, to suffer and be martyrs.”

The verse I quoted at the top of this post, John 17:17, gives God's version of the story as Jesus prays to the Father: Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.
As born-again believers abide in Christ through His word and prayer, we are sanctified within and truly made holy, not just 'dunghills covered in snow' as Aimee quoted from Martn Luther (who was talking about justification, not sanctification; and I don't think I agree with him on this anyway). For born-again christians being justified or made right with God through Christ's imputed righteousness is only the beginning. How are we made holy? See Romans 12:1-2:

1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

How are our minds renewed? See Psalm 119:9-11:

9 How can a young man cleanse his way?
By taking heed according to Your word.
10 With my whole heart I have sought You;
Oh, let me not wander from Your commandments!
11 Your word I have hidden in my heart,
That I might not sin against You.

Jesus is the Word and the Bread of Life, and we abide in Him in His word:

Matthew 4:4
4 But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’”

The 'Catholic gospel'

I recently read a post on the Catholic blog Historical Christian, owned by Aimee Cooper, a convert to Roman Catholicism. She has developed and is teaching a course on 'Understanding the Catholic Gospel' and on her blog she has posted about her class being made available as a distance learning course.
In her post, she makes a statement comparing the 'protestant gospel' as she understands it, to the 'Catholic gospel' which she says is the 'authentic' gospel.
I was concerned because her description of the 'protestant gospel' was inaccurate and made protestant teaching seem very shallow and powerless. Here is one of her statements:

In part, it is the difference between imputed and infused grace, between sanctifying and fully sacramental grace, between simply believing in Jesus to go to heaven, and truly becoming the dwelling place of God, here and now, during this life, through union with Christ in the sacraments.

After reading this, I wrote a comment and posted it on her blog. She read it and deleted it, making this comment about it:

By the way, there was a long polemical comment on here that I just deleted (I was away for a few hours and hadn't seen it). The person is known to me, and knows they're not welcome here. Not the first time I've encountered this individual - and it's always unpleasant. Sorry about that. I'm very happy to discuss Catholicism with people who really want to learn about it - but I don't enjoy arguing with people who's minds are already made up against it.

Here is the comment she deleted, minus my quote of her statement:

I agree with you that the Catholic gospel and the protestant gospel are different, but I don't know where the 'protestant gospel' you are referring to comes from; it doesn't sound like the Biblical gospel, and neither does your description of the Catholic gospel. If in the past you have been taught a false supposed 'protestant gospel' that doesn't mean that the Bible gospel is not true; nor does it mean that the Catholic version IS true.
The Biblical gospel does NOT teach 'simply believing in Jesus to go to heaven' but it does teach believing in Jesus as Savior, trusting in His sacrifice alone for salvation, then being indwelt by the Holy Spirit, sanctified by Him, and living by faith in Him, abiding in His Word and in prayer, fellowshipping with the saints, and so on.
You referred to 'the difference between imputed and infused grace.' The bible doesn't refer to imputed (or infused) grace, but it does refer to imputed righteousness, which is
what happens when we are justified (made right with God) by faith in Christ. See Romans 4:
3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
You infer that 'protestant' christians don't teach that believers 'truly become the dwelling place of God here and now, during this life.' Well, becoming the dwelling place of God is the whole message of the gospel as taught in the Scriptures, without any help needed from 'church fathers' or magisterium, or church tradition. If some protestants have failed to teach this, it doesn't mean this isn't the gospel of the Apostles (who were not Roman Catholic) and the Reformers (who were not perfect, but did understand the scriptures very well). You, in proclaiming the need for this course, have admitted that the RCC has largely failed to teach her own people the 'Catholic gospel.' I submit that this is because she doesn't have the gospel at all.
The fact that people are saying 'Catholicism is too big' to share easily, is because it is full of cumbersome manmade traditions and doctrines that obscure the true simple gospel that comes from God's word.
Jennie

Well, looking back at my comment, it IS polemical, as Aimee said, but not the less true. She says I know I'm not welcome, but I have never commented on her blog before (We emailed back and forth a few times several months ago as we discussed some questions and comments I had about the Roman Catholic church; she didn't want to continue the discussion, because she felt I was not 'genuinely' interested in the RCC. I was, but not in converting). I went back and tried to comment again, twice, but it seems my comments are blocked. The last comment I believe was the best, and was not 'polemical' but just straightforwardly explaining, using scripture, what the true gospel was as opposed to her description. Unfortunately I did not save it, but it contained some of what I already quoted, plus some other good scriptures from Romans. I'll try to recreate it here:

Aimee, I hope you will allow this comment because I am concerned that your description of the 'protestant gospel' is inaccurate and should be corrrected. I will try not to be 'polemical' this time:)
In your statement you referred to 'the difference between imputed and infused grace.'
The bible does not mention imputed grace, but it does refer to imputed RIGHTEOUSNESS, which is what occurs when a believer is justified by faith in Christ's sacrifice on the cross. See Romans 4:
3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
Secondly, the bible teaches that a believer goes through a process of sanctification which begins when the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in him/her upon coming to faith in Christ. The Spirit draws us into a relationship with Christ and teaches us through God's word. We are freed from sin and made holy as we continue in this relationship. This is in contrast to the Roman Catholic teaching of salvation and indwelling through the sacrament of the eucharist. See Romans 6:
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

Finally, you infer that protestants don't believe and teach that believers become the true dwelling place of God here and now; but this is the central teaching of the protestant (biblical) gospel. See Romans 8:
1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. 10 And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.
Thank you,
Jennie

That's as close as I could get to the original comment.
For more information on why the Catholic gospel is not the true gospel, see my post on 'Why I will never go home to Roman Catholicism.'

An email response to Internetmonk

For the benefit of readers who come over from SolaMom, Everyday Mommy, or Internetmonk.com after reading comments there, here is my email response to Michael Spenser about his quoting my 'Canon' comment on his blog:

Hello Michael,

On a whim I decided to check out your blog today and I was astonished to see that you had written a post that quoted from a comment I had made to Ragamuffin about the Canon on Jules' blog.

I must admit to some chagrin upon seeing my admittedly way over-simplified explanation used as a springboard in that way. Again, my comment was over-simplified and also did not accurately portray my own understanding of the subject, as I was not trying to prove anything except that everyone doesn't agree that the catholics 'gave us' the Canon, etc. I definitely will try in the future to include enough info. to make my viewpoint clear, since a mis-statement apparently can take on a life of it's own in the blog world.

I am definitely not a scholar on the subject, by any means, but neither am I totally ignorant or without curiosity about how the canon was established. I have been reading various sources from the protestant and catholic viewpoints on the historical church for many months, being extremely curious and driven to try to reconcile the different claims and the contrary historical accounts; I can't claim to have solved a controversy that has raged for centuries, but I have begun to understand a little, and have concluded, from what I have learned so far, that the RCC is not the original church as it claims, that it has claimed sole authority without regard to all other valid groups, that it has over the centuries added error upon error even though its core catechisms contain the seeds of truth, that it claims men as RC that were not, that the early centuries that the RC claims as her own are more 'catholic' or transitional than 'Roman' catholic (since practices and doctrines that are specifically RC came in later and gradually).

Here is one of several sources I have read in the past months about the Canon: http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_canon_nicole.html. I think this man makes alot of sense.

To clarify, I am not Landmark, and am not familiar with them; since my childhood I have attended, roughly in this order: Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, Southern Baptist, various Baptist and nondenominational churches, Methodist, Southern Baptist. Nor am I KJV only, though we are careful about which versions we use; I use the NKJV mainly.

I don't think I have all the answers, and I think we'll all be surprised someday about what we 'know' is right, but I also know that in my limited understanding, I must cling to God's word to correct and guide me. I hope to grow in love and understanding, while holding to the truth of His word.

In Christ,

Jennie (pilgrimsdaughter)

My first post; worse than a blank canvas

I'm writing this first post so people who read my comments on other blogs have a way to contact me if they want to.
Right now I can't think of anything exciting to say, except that being more of an artist than a writer, this blank window is worse than a blank canvas, because in filling it I'm revealing more of myself than in a drawing.
Anyway, I hope to have things to post on many subjects in the future.
See ya later.
Jen