1 John 5:13 - Whats the Catholic Response?

[Ignatius]

“I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.”

How is this verse in accordance with the very next lines where mortal sin is discussed? In what way does John mean we can **know **we have eternal life? Obviously this is against Catholic teaching, and it is in fact against his very next verses on mortal sins, so obviously the straight-forward interpretation is not what John intended here…what exactly does he mean by “know?”

Thanks in advance for the comments,
Michael

We know that we have eternal life if we do all the Christ commanded.

 

[reen12]

Dear awfulthings9,

Thank you for a full reply to my own concern.

You know, I spent decades of my life defending
the Church’s doctrines, often using categories
to accomplish this. *really *at home with such.]

We can’t do without them. We need human
language that is precise and logical in order
to think and to communicate effectively and succintly.

As the years have rolled on, I find myself turning
to biblical references, whenever I can, to
accomplish what I used to employ categories
to achieve. Does that make sense to you?

It has finally dawned on me that the “good news”
really *is *Good News.

I do appreciate your kindness and your patience
in replying to my posts.

God bless you richly,
Maureen

 

[TobyLue]

“I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.”

I am outside mowing my lawn. There is a big storm with plenty of hail and lighting coming my way. I KNOW that if I go inside I will avoid the possibility of getting struck by lightning and getting all wet. But I decide to stay outside. Is it good enough to just “KNOW” that I need to get inside or must I do something else?

If I “KNOW” the way to San Jose, but take a train to Indianapolis, will I get to San Jose simply because I “KNOW” the way to San Jose? We all “KNOW” that because of Jesus’ sacrifice on Calvary we have eternal life. But I also have a free will and I can reject eternal life.
Lucifer “KNEW” the consequences, yet he still refused to serve.

 

[reen12]

Dear TobyLue,

I understand what you are saying.
At the same time, it can also be said:

“The joy that comes in knowing that I try to
serve God the best I can, that I repent when
I sin, that my salvation is in the keeping of
Jesus, and that He will lead me home, brings
blessed relief of heart, soul and mind.
Not “relative assurance.”
Blessed Assurance.” quote, reen12

This, too, is a form of “knowing.”

Best regards,
reen12

Lyrics to Blessed Assurance:

cyberhymnal.org/htm/b/l/e/blesseda.htm

 

[reen12]

reen12:

Dear TobyLue,

I understand what you are saying.
At the same time, it can also be said:

“The joy that comes in knowing that I try to
serve God the best I can, that I repent when
I sin, that my salvation is in the keeping of
Jesus, and that He will lead me home, brings
blessed relief of heart, soul and mind.
Not “relative assurance.”
Blessed Assurance.” quote, reen12

This, too, is a form of “knowing.”

Best regards,
reen12

Lyrics to Blessed Assurance:

cyberhymnal.org/htm/b/l/e/blesseda.htm

 

[m8p]

Thank You!
El Católico:

This is not against catholic teaching at all. To believe is to have eternal life…faith which is salvific must be accompanied by good works.

 

[javelin]

Caldera:

Awfulthings9,

Thanks for your replies…

I guess my biggest problem for me is that i knew the love of Christ in the church before i knew what was expected of me to be Catholic.

The requirements for being a “member” of the Catholic Church are not easy to swallow. Like i said, the more i look into what is required to be believed, the more difficult it gets.

There are quite a few things that bother me right now, but i’ll give you an example of one:

Dogma: The Assumption of Mary

This Dogma was declared 1,950 years after Christ died. That’s a long time…

Question: How is believing that Mary was assumed into heaven going to help my own salvation? This is what the church is telling you by declaring it a dogma. You must believe it without any doubt, or you risk losing your salvation.

Problem: The Church can offer no proof that this ever happened. There is nothing in scripture that says anything about it. You just have to believe it because they said it.

This has nothing to do with Christ dying on the cross for the sins of the world. It seems like an unnecessary rule/requirement for the member to have to believe without any doubt in order to have salvation. You risk eternal damnation if you disagree…

Why would they do this? Are they just trying to flex their authority muscle? Are they trying to set themselves up for persecution?

Christ is the one who reaches out to people and draws them with love, while the church seemingly makes difficult rules that make it hard to become a “member”.

Was protestantism a mistake?

I can easily argue from both sides of Christianity, but i have no answers for sure… just questions.

Caldera,

I highlighted a couple things above that I thought I might be able to address. The Church teaches that we are to hold defined dogma with assurance of faith and give intellectual assent to them. This does not mean that we cannot have any doubts or misunderstandings as to what they mean, or how they affect our lives. It simply means that we defer to the Chruch’s guidance and teaching authority.

I struggled with some of these same questions (and still do at times). A couple things really helped me:

1. The Church itself doesn’t believe it can “create dogma”, nor does it use its authority to bind and loose to “create sin” from which it can save people. Its divine mission is to proclaim the Truth, and it will never bend to society or “the gates of hell” in carrying out its mission. If it believes something to be undeniably true, the Church has a divine duty proclaim it.
2. The Church has had enough enemies over the centuries that it is really amazing to me that the best evidence those enemies have for refuting doctrines like the Assumption is a “lack of Biblical support”. All it would take to prove the Assumption is not a “constant and universal” teaching of the Church is one solid Church document or official proclamation from 2000 years denying that doctrine. Well guess what. There is none. I can’t believe that they would not have found it if it was there, given the animosity of some and the sheer vast amount of time.

That said, the Church does not rely on the lack of evidence refuting the doctrine to have the assurance that it is undeniably true. One could reason the doctrine rather easily, in fact, like this: “If Mary was indeed immaculately conceived and protected throughout her life from all sin, and the wages of sin is death, then since she had no sin she should have no death.” Obviously this requires belief in the Immaculate Conception, but at leat it can bring one to the point where they could reasonably say “if the Immaculate Conception is true, then I can believe the Assumption to be true as well”.

I hope this makes at least some sense to you; I’m not all that great at explaning some of these things…

As for “becoming a member”, the Church teaches that all who are baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are “members” of the universal Catholic Church. The inherent danger in disbelieving dogma is that some other belief (heresy) must take its place. Disbelief can lead to heresy, which can lead to other grave sin very quickly. In addition, our sins of disbelief can lead others astray as well, and has the potential of risking their salvation. Finally, disbelief makes apparent a lack of trust in the Church that Christ Himself founded and protects, and in a way, rejecting Truth is rejecting Christ. This is not just Church invention, but a reflection of reality that Christ reveals through the Church and desparately wants us to see.

The Church does not mean to frighten you or manipulate you, rather it tries to steer you away from that which is untrue, for it is there that the enemy of all mankind holds his power and weilds it to divide us – the Body of Christ.

May the Grace and Peace of Jesus Christ be with you always –

javelin

 

[Caldera]

Thanks Reen12 and Javelin for your thoughts on the matter. I appreciate it.

Let me try to put it another way…

It’s not the declaration of the Assumption of Mary into Heaven that is the issue, it’s the fact that it creates another obstacle for the church member to be bound to accept/overcome in order to be able to get to heaven.

For me, it’s really not a big deal to be honest. I can easily look at it like “Sure, whatever…not a problem” because it doesn’t affect me or my lifestyle in anyway. Now on the other hand, the already “separated brethren” (who already have issues) see this and think “Whoa Nelly! Where pray-tell did that come from?” - which can actually further continue the division in the church rather than help draw christians back “home”.

Let’s say for example that i can accept everything the church teaches except for the Assumption. (for whatever reason) What happens? Because the Assumption of Mary is now bound to be believed without a doubt, i technically separate myself from the true church. It becomes MY own loss…Whoa is me!
Jesus, the one who died for our sins on the cross, now becomes lost in the process. So technically, Mary now becomes the obstacle to Christ because of church law which made it that way.

Why was this necessary to be declared a Dogma? The Church went 1,900+ years without it, then suddenly woke up one day in the year 1950 and decided they knew for sure that it happened without any doubt, but also without any proof whatsoever. Bam!, new Dogma.

I have no authority to say these things, but wouldn’t it have been a better choice to say “We strongly urge our members to accept the Assumption of Mary into heaven as a known truth” while adding the feast day celebration, etc. instead of making it bound to be believed by it’s members? (I know i’m going to catch a lot of you know what for saying that. hehe)

Reen12, before i left for work this morning i was able to read your reply… At first it hit me like a ton of bricks, and i ended up thinking about it most of the day…

The Church for me is all about the Sacraments. The Eucharist is without any doubt the “summit” of the faith. For any Protestants reading this, and for what it’s worth, you will never know the true love of Jesus Christ until you experience the sacraments of Reconciliation and Eucharist. It’s as real as real can get, and the presence of Christ is no doubt within the church. Period.

Now with that said… Maybe…just MAYBE, it might not be out of the realm of possibilities that the Roman Catholic Church is the true church of Christ. (I said maybe!)
When i was thinking about it today, it struck me that MAYBE God likes to test our faith. Maybe God is testing our ability to accept these things like little children (if you know what i mean), and give us an opportunity to show humble obedience and trust.

Remember i said maybe. http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

 

[Nan_S]

Caldera:

It’s not the declaration of the Assumption of Mary into Heaven that is the issue, it’s the fact that it creates another obstacle for the church member to be bound to accept/overcome in order to be able to get to heaven.
Let’s say for example that i can accept everything the church teaches except for the Assumption. (for whatever reason) What happens? Because the Assumption of Mary is now bound to be believed without a doubt, i technically separate myself from the true church. It becomes MY own loss…Whoa is me!

As Catholics we are members of a church with 2,000 years of theologians who have spent lifetimes pondering truths of the faith. Many of these I understand, but some I do not. That’s OK. Because one of the truths I DO understand is that the Catholic church has teaching authority. If these thousands of theologians over 2,000 years have come to a consensus on a matter of faith, like the Assumption of Mary, I would be foolish to deny it simply because I don’t understand it.

Caldera:

Why was this necessary to be declared a Dogma? The Church went 1,900+ years without it, then suddenly woke up one day in the year 1950 and decided they knew for sure that it happened without any doubt, but also without any proof whatsoever. Bam!, new Dogma.

The only “Bam!” was that the dogma was formally stated as such. Most church historians and theologians believed in the Assumption for well over 1,500 years. On thing they we CAN prove is that no church, anywhere, has any relics of Mary. We have relics, burial sites, and pilgrimage devotions to them for nearly every other significant person from the early church. But no one, anywhere, has any relics of the Virgin Mary.

In 590 AD, St. Gregory of Tours wrote in his book In Gloria Martyrum:
“The course of this life having been completed by Blessed Mary, when now she would be called from this world, all the Apostles came together from their various regions to her house. And when they had heard that she was about to be taken from the world, they kept watch together with her. And behold, the Lord Jesus came with His angels, and taking her soul, He gave it over to the Angel Michael and withdrew. At daybreak, however, the apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb; and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; and the holy body having been received, He commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise; where now, rejoined to the soul, Mary rejoices with the Lord’s chosen ones, and is in the enjoyment of the good of an eternity that will never end.”

 

[michaelgazin]

Epiphanius said in A.D. 377, “Let them search the scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried. More than that: John journeyed to Asia, yet nowhere do we read that he took the holy Virgin with him. Rather, Scripture is absolutely silent [on Mary’s earthly end] because of the extraordinary nature of the prodigy, in order not to shock the minds of men. . . . Neither do I maintain stoutly that she died. . . .”

Neither Jerome, Origen, Athanasius, Ambrose, nor Augustine contested Epiphanius in what he had written regarding Mary’s miraculous passing, and Ephraem (d. 373) described Mary as having been glorified by Christ and carried through the air to heaven (Cf. Ephraem, De nativitate domini sermo 12, sermo 11, sermo 4; Opera omni syriace at latine, Vol. 2, 415). Throughout history, there have been very few opponents in the Church of Mary’s Assumption. In fact, the first opposition to the Assumption cannot be found until Ambrosius Autpertus of the eighth century.

 

[jburgherr]

“I write this to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.”

Michael

John, also writes in 2nd John, 1:8: “Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.”

If one “knows” and is “assured” of salvation, how can one lose what has been won. John seems to imply that Salvation can indeed be lost.