Bridging the "Faith Alone" Divide

[Church_Militant]

Yes, let Jesus dwell in our hearts by faith - that should come first.
(Ephesians 3 and Colossians 3.)

This doesn’t answer my question at all.

And we can examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith.

2 Corinthians 13:5.

Gee, we Catholics do that a lot. It’s called an Examination of Conscience.

My conviction is that when we read a persons theological views, we should see if they are consistent with the Scriptures.

Read My Testimony. That’s WHY I am a Catholic!

Everybody can be dogmatic, even pragmatic in over-emphasizing some things.

And you’re not?

-Another good reason to compare what anyone says - with the Bible. (Some think that they are above this.)

No idea who you’re referring to there. I often doubt that most people I talk to have done half the research and comparison that I have.

 

[JoeyWarren]

Tah Dah Man said: My conviction is that when we read a persons theological views, we should see if they are consistent with the Scriptures.

And my conviction is that most protestant theological views are not consistent with Scripture.

 

[Tah_Dah_Man]

You are trying to get me to surrender to “The Church” -yes?
You believe that being faithful to “The Church” is being faithful to Jesus.
And I believe that being faithful to the Scriptures is being faithful to Jesus.
You point people to “The Church.”
I point people to the Scriptures.
You cannot do both (faithfully).
I came to a fork in the road in the early 80s.
I used to attend Mass almost everyday for about three years.
When reading my missal, I always gravitated to the Scriptures over the other dogmatic writ, for that is what I have learned to feed on.
And reading the Scriptures in the Bible shows the way. That is my focus.
Dogma does not “go hand in hand with the Scriptures”, as many have claimed.

(Link removed)

http://www.chick.com/information/religions/catholicism/

 

[Church_Militant]

You are trying to get me to surrender to “The Church” -yes?

You really need to learn to use the quote feature around here so people can see who you’re responding to.

I’m not trying to get you to do anything…except stop making silly remarks about the Catholic Church that are not true.

You believe that being faithful to “The Church” is being faithful to Jesus.

Okay…let’s just look at that in the context of the Bible that you say is your authority.

What did Jesus say he came to build? Matthew 16: 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. Jesus did not commission the writing of the New Testament, and you cannot produce a single scripture that says that He did. St. Paul knew this even though he was an apostle “born out of time” and yet he tells St. Timothy, “15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” (1st epistle, chapter 3) What does he say is the pillar and ground of the truth? Notice, it’s NOT the scriptures. It’s the church that Christ founded. Not one that men did 1500 years later.

And I believe that being faithful to the Scriptures is being faithful to Jesus.

A partial and inadequate expression of truth. Who did Our Lord Himself establish as the pillar and ground of the truth? IOW, who is ordained by the Lord to interpret the Word of God correctly? Can you produce any scripture that asserts that that is left up to individual believers with Bibles in hand? I don’t think you can.

You point people to “The Church.”
I point people to the Scriptures.
You cannot do both (faithfully).

A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Giving a person a Bible is a nice thing to do but even in doing so you have essentially created a modern Ethiopian Eunuch situation. You are correct that you cannot do both faithfully because they will respond with the same words as that eunuch, (Acts 8) " 30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest? 31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him." So it seems that your concept is unscriptural and flawed at best.

I came to a fork in the road in the early 80s.
I used to attend Mass almost everyday for about three years.
When reading my missal, I always gravitated to the Scriptures over the other dogmatic writ, for that is what I have learned to feed on.

And it appears that you departed from the truth. Why? Because you didn’t do what that eunuch did…turn to the Church for teaching and correction.

And reading the Scriptures in the Bible shows the way. That is my focus.

Really? Well then I suppose that all those who could not and cannot (today) read the Bible are then going into perdition according to what you believe? That’s the logical conclusion to be drawn from you comments.

Dogma does not “go hand in hand with the Scriptures”, as many have claimed.

So sayeth you, but then you offer a link to Jack Chick’s site which promotes gross lies and complete misinformation about the Catholic faith. Even when I was till outside the Catholic Church I quit using his materials because of this. Will you have the courage of your conviction to “carefully study to show yourself approved unto God” and read this very long and concise refutation of his lies, misinformation, and errors? Chick Tracts
I challenge you to do so.

(I won’t quote that link here because I know it violates the forum rules in the way you have used it.)

 

[Randy_Carson]

You are trying to get me to surrender to “The Church” -yes?
You believe that being faithful to “The Church” is being faithful to Jesus.
And I believe that being faithful to the Scriptures is being faithful to Jesus.
You point people to “The Church.”

And interestingly, the Scriptures point repeatedly to the Church.

1 Timothy 3:15
if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

You see, neither Jesus nor the Apostles ever envisioned that people like you would come along proclaiming a “me, Jesus, and my bible” gospel.

Instead, Jesus said, “He who hears you, hears me.” (Luke 10:16)

I point people to the Scriptures.

Great…because the more they read the Bible, the more they will realize that the Catholic Church is the only Church founded by Jesus.

You cannot do both (faithfully).

Of course you can since there is no dichotomy.

 

[Tah_Dah_Man]

The Rock.
Deuteronomy 32:18, 31. 1 Samuel 2:2. 2 Samuel 22:2, 47. Isaiah 17:10. Romans 9:33. Psalms 27:5. 31:1. 61:2. 94:22.

1 Corinthians, chapter10. Paul, the Christian Jew.
“Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, 2 all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.”

1 Corinthians 3:11 (entire chapter). Paul.
“For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”
(2 Timothy 2:15-19. Proverbs 10:25. Psalm 127:1.)

Luke 22:24-34. The disciples argue about greatness (“Primacy” -Who kisses who’s ***?)
24 “Now there was also a dispute among them, as to which of them should be considered the greatest…”
[Jesus then lines them out, and foretells Peter’s denial.]

And later, after Pentecost (In taking the cake):
“In matters of faith and practice”
Paul rebukes and corrects Peter (the Pope?): in his pontifical Primacy? -Galatians 2:11-21. -Galatians 2 - 3 (entire chapters).

As they say, “The rest is History.” (Not that I’m trying to make Paul, Peter, or anyone a “Pope.”)
-Notice that Peter (in all of his alleged positional power) did not rebuke Paul, nor say anything to the effect, such as:
“What? Correct me, will you? -See you in confession, mister!”
“You’re supposed to address me as ‘Your Eminence!’”
“Besides, who are you to judge another man’s servant?”
“Now, prostrate yourself before me! -Vow, and give it up!”

Who’s The Rock ?

“And I say to you that you are Peter (petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church, and the gates of Hell (Hades) shall not prevail against it.” -Jesus. Matthew 16:18.

Peter = petros = Greek for: little stone = one of the living stones = a member of the body of Christ.

? ? ? = petra = Greek for: large rock = The Chief Cornerstone = Jesus is The Rock = The Head of the Church.

Psalm 18:31. King David.
“For who is God, except the Lord? And who is a rock, except our God?”

Psalm 40:2. King David (and U-2 band’s “40”).
“He brought me up out of a horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and made my footsteps firm.”

Psalm 62:2.
“He alone is my rock and my salvation; He is my defense; I shall not be greatly moved (shaken).”

“For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” -Paul.
1 Corinthians 3:11 (entire chapter). (2 Timothy 2:15-19. Proverbs 10:25.)

Jesus is The Rock (and, The Word of God. John, chapter 1.) Luke 6:46-49.
“Whoever comes to Me, and hears My sayings and does them, I will show you whom he is like:
48 He is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently against the house, and it could not shake it, for it was founded on the rock.
49 But he who heard and did nothing is like a man who built a house on the earth without a foundation, against which the stream beat vehemently; and immediately it fell. And the ruin of that house was great.”

I believe Jesus is The Rock of Ages.
If you don’t want Jesus to be the Rock, take it up with Peter.

(See next post…)

 

[Tah_Dah_Man]

1 Peter, chapter 2. Peter further reiterates and clarifies distinctly in his epistle:
2 “…as newborn babes, desire the pure milk of the word, that you may grow thereby,
3 if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
6 Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture: “Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious, and he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.” [Jesus, not Peter.]
7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, “The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone,”
8 and, “A stone of stumbling and a rock of offense.” They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they were also appointed.
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;
10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.”

Ephesians 2:13-22. Paul.
13 “But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation,
15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances [against us], so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,
16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.
17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near.
18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.
19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,
21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord,
22 in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.”

Acts 4:10-12. Peter.
10 “…let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.
11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’
12. “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” –Peter.
(1 Peter 2:1-10. Matthew 21:42-46. Mark 12:10-12. Luke 20:17-19.)

IS THIS NOT THE ORIGINAL CHRISTIAN FAITH ?

“Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you: exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” - St. Jude, v3. First Century A.D.

-He speaks to me. How ‘bout you?

Essential Christianity is Original Christianity.

Let’s read our New Testament. :bible1:

Merry Christmas!

 

[Tah_Dah_Man]

According to the following Scriptures:bible1:

Who’s “The Head of the Church?”

Ephesians 1:15-23; 4:7-16; 5:22-33.

Colossians, chapters 1-2.

1 Corinthians, chapter 11.

:bowdown2:

 

[Tah_Dah_Man]

Time for MNF

(Monday Night Football)

Later…

 

[Church_Militant]

Time for MNF

(Monday Night Football)

Later…

:yawn:

 

[Tah_Dah_Man]

James 2:24: You see that a person is justified by works and **not **by faith alone.

This is James’ answer to his question in 2:14. Can faith (on its own) save (justify) someone?

Good question. The Apostles were not at odds with one another. They don’t really add up to dueling doctrines.
We can be justified by faith in Jesus, saved by grace in Jesus, and our works would follow. They all believed that works are important. And when we are seen or known to do the works and deeds that are expected of us by God and man, we are justified in that respect - in the sight of God and man.
I believe that there are two kinds of justification going on here. One unto salvation (God’s free gift received), and the other unto doing God’s work (actually: God working in us). Works: Spreading the Gospel. Living it by the Holy Spirit, etc.
If Jesus lives in us then our spirits are redeemed, but our bodies are not -yet. Not until the resurrection will we have redeemed bodies. So, thus the struggle. My flesh doesn’t want to do what the Holy Spirit would do. We can be mastered by our flesh, or our spirit will master our flesh by the power of the Holy Spirit. This is how things are or are not accomplished - yes?
We are already saved even though all of this struggle is going on. Then we will rest from our labors with Jesus in Heaven - maybe without an alledged “Purgatory.”:heaven:

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Atemi-

Your questions here are insightful, and I would like to address them.

Catholics must resist the slogan "faith alone’ for several reasons.

1. It is not Biblical. James 2:24 shows this in no uncertain terms.

It does no such thing. To say it does is to confuse a similarity of words with a difference over substance.​

To use those words by themselves, is a very weak argument indeed for the idea that the Apostle is condemning justification by faith alone.

1. It is devisive. Even the intramural squabbles among non-Catholics over antinomianism shows that “faith alone” is problematic.

Dogmas are divisive too - so let’s throw them away

Antinomianism is a problem which Protestants are at least aware of - & plenty of them try to do something about it, & have been for centuries. It’s a constant temptation, just like legalism, & like legalism it takes a thousand different forms.

1. It is confusing. And here, I hope you’ll indulge me as Mr. Akin addresses this point better than I could:

Only to those who are incapable of understanding it. Some people can’t. Just as some can’t make head or tail of St. Thomas. That doesn’t make his theology negligible rubbish, & neither does the inability of the reader or hearer make Protestant theology negligible rubbish. The failure is in them, not in it​

Consequently, Catholics will not in common practice use the term “Faith Alone” though we can agree with it when properly undestood.

It is incumbent upon those Protestants who cling to that slogan so dearly to recognize the problems described above and to abandon their attempts to teach a biblical concept in language that is itself unbiblical.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

It is Biblical, & it is Christian - far more so than EENS, which really is unBiblical, because it perverts the very meaning of the Church, by forgetting that the God of all Grace has mercy on whom He Wills, & not on whom the unbelieving hearts of men require Him to. EENS confuses His Faithfulness with His being His Church’s lapdog.​

Plenty of theological language is post-Biblical & unBiblical - necessarily so. The Arians rejected the Nicene word homoosion for that very reason; as well as because it had been used by the heretic Paul of Samosata in the 270s. “Salvation by faith alone” captures the paradox of Christian salvation very well; faith is alone, because we sinners can come to Christ only with empty hands & without any least claim on His Mercy - it is essential precisely because it reminds us that salvation is by grace alone, & not by works done by us in righteousness: for neither we not our works are righteous before we are justified freely by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.

To deny or reject or dilute grace alone is to deny the freeness of God’s free & sovereign saving grace. That cannot be done without denying the Gospel. The positive protest - the positive witness, the positive testimony to Christ - of the Reformers was necessary, & must on no account be undone, for the Church greatly needs it.

 

[that1dude]

Forget scripture and gospel. Too open to interpretation. If you posit a semi-benevolent god and a heaven and hell, then you must agree that a person can get into heaven with absolutely no faith at all. (I say “semi-benevolent”, because a totally-benevolent god would not allow suffering, period.) Otherwise, you are positing an evil malevolent god who would not allow a loving, charitable non-believer to hang with his mother for all eternity. There is no compelling evidence for the existence of a deity, yet I am a good person. Am I punished for all eternity?

 

[justinthemartyr]

the greatest of these is charity, not faith.

This is why faith worked out in love is necessary.

Grace, faith worked out in love. period.

 

[that1dude]

the greatest of these is charity, not faith.

This is why faith worked out in love is necessary.

Grace, faith worked out in love. period.

In english please. What does this mean? I doubt any deities exist. But I do good things. Does your god let me into its heaven?