The Catholic perspective is that works are the fruits of faith. A healthy faith naturally produces works. Faith without works are dead. They represent two sides of the same thing.
Works themselves do not lead to salvation. Salvation is from the grace of God. But with good faith one will feel a compulsion to do good works.
There are references in the Bible to a purification/sanctification process given to those that are saved.
The Catholic position is that this process of transformation takes place in purgatory prior to release into heaven. From the Catholic perspective only those that are saved will enter purgatory. Purgatory is not a state that the damned enter into.
For the sake of discussion in this thread, the Bible is assumed to be true. We are evaluating whether purgatory is: a) consistent with scripture, and b) if consistent, whether it is compellingly the case or not.
Catholic doctrine takes the position that Mary is sinless and a perpetual virgin. She is honoured in the Church as "Queen of Heaven" and the perfect disciple of Christ.
This thread is for discussing that topic from a Catholic perspective vs other kinds of Christian perspectives. For the sake of this discussion, the focus is not on prayer to saints and only pertains to the question of whether Mary is 1) sinless, 2) perpetually virginal, 3) "Queen of Heaven" in a sense that differs from "queen of heaven" in Jer 44:19.
For the purpose of discussion, the Bible is considered to be true. The test is to evaluate a) whether the position is consistent with scripture, and b) if consistent, whether it is compellingly the case from scripture.
Some verses that are used against the Catholic position:
- References to brothers and sisters of Jesus
- Joseph not consummating the marriage "until" after Jesus' birth
In 1 Cor 4:15, Paul references himself to have "begotten" or being a "father" for others through the gospels in Jesus Christ.
The Catholic sense of "Father" echos that same usage.
"For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel." - 1 Cor 4:15 KJV
Transubstantiation in the Catholic faith is essentially the rite of having the metaphysical essence transformed/replaced by the presence of Christ. While the outward form/affect remains bread, the essence is the real presence of Christ.
The bread transforms into a vessel of the body and blood of Christ.
The rite follows from the Last Supper. This rite differs slightly from other Christian practises where the body is to bread and the blood is to wine in a 1:1 reflection of the enactment of the Last Supper.
For the sake of discussion in this thread the Bible is assumed to be true. This thread is to evaluate whether transubstantiation is: a) consistent with scripture, and b) if consistent, whether it is compellingly true.
"Forty and two= years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri." - 2 Chron 22:2 KJV
"Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel." - 2 Kings 8:26 KJV
I don’t have a problem with it but I thought your religion was against it? There are historians that do say jesus could have been trans so maybe that is why? They want to be like their false messiah?
I'm sick of it. Idc what God you worship. Focus on the problem, and don't expect anyone riding a cloud to fix it. It seems to me that Christianity in the conversational sense is a HUGE DISTRACTION to a more critical problem.
