Can a protestant tell me what this is from and what its talking about

  • Thread starter Thread starter ignatius777
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Its fantastic that we agree…faith and works saves while works or faith alone has no value. AMEN
I’m going to quote your fellow Catholic, guanophore, and hope that if I am interpreting him incorrectly, he will come back to clarify.
There is a big difference between working “out” and working “on”. There is nothing that we can do to pay our debt to God, or to save ourselves. We are saved by grace, through faith, and not of our works of righteousness, lest we boast.
What we are working “out” is what has been placed in us at baptism by grace. It is God in us enabling us to work for His pleasure, not we ourselves. We cooperate with His grace to become the persons He has made us to be.
That does not deny to importance of works for the regenerate, but the works of Mother Theresa, great though they were, did not save her. Her active, living faith (which came about only by Grace), working through love, did, .

Jon
 
III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins; and, for a time, continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve His Holy Spirit, come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts, have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves

Cant wait to hear your thoughts
And I thought I was bad with the run-on sentences.
 
That does not deny to importance of works for the regenerate, but the works of Mother Theresa, great though they were, did not save her. Her active, living faith (which came about only by Grace), working through love, did, .

Jon
I’m sure she agrees.
 
I’m going to quote your fellow Catholic, guanophore, and hope that if I am interpreting him incorrectly, he will come back to clarify.

That does not deny to importance of works for the regenerate, but the works of Mother Theresa, great though they were, did not save her. Her active, living faith (which came about only by Grace), working through love, did, .

Jon
And her faith without works is just as useless
 
I don’t agree with the Reformed understanding of perseverance, however, the above is a bit of a caricature. The Reformed would not argue that election is a bare bones deal wherein the person just gets saved and sits on the couch until they die. They do hold that perseverance works through means. The sacraments/ordinances, good works, repentance, etc.
If its a caricature its not of my making. For what reason does a person need to persevere if they are one of the “elect”? It doesnt add up no matter how you slice it.
 
And her faith without works is just as useless
Agreed, because that would be, as James rightly points out, a dead faith, and not a saving faith. So, it is grace through faith in Christ that saves, but it must be a faith that works through love.

Jon
 
That isn’t an issue because it has never been our contention that true faith does not produce works. The problem is that Roman Catholicism teaches that works merit the progressive grace of justification.

We simply argue that the only reason good works are good works is because the Christian is already fully justified. You cannot produce good fruit unless the root is good.
Of course works merit the progressive grace of justification becuase it cant be seperated from faith thereby having the same effect. NO ONE but protestants claim that anyone believes works alone does anything
 
NO ONE but protestants claim that anyone believes works alone does anything
I’m sure you are not referring to Augsburg or me, since neither of us have made that claim. What’s more, Lutheranism doesn’t make that charge against Catholicism, and those who do make that claim are wrong.
Of course works merit the progressive grace of justification becuase it cant be seperated from faith thereby having the same effect.
Could you explain further how you mean this? This is an interesting comment that I’d like to hear more about.

Jon
 
I’m sure you are not referring to Augsburg or me, since neither of us have made that claim. What’s more, Lutheranism doesn’t make that charge against Catholicism, and those who do make that claim are wrong.

Could you explain further how you mean this? This is an interesting comment that I’d like to hear more about.

Jon
If it doesnt refer to you then it has nothing to do with you

I believe I have explained my comment NUMEROUS times but I’ll do it again. Works can not be seperated from faith can it, since we all agree that faith without works cant save anyone. So works AND faith are necessary AND sufficient for salvation.
 
Agreed, because that would be, as James rightly points out, a dead faith, and not a saving faith. So, it is grace through faith in Christ that saves, but it must be a faith that works through love.

Jon
Correct Jon so faith without works and works without faith are useless. Why do we need to repeat over and over again that we agree
 
Code:
No one is suggesting that our works are on the same par as Christ's work but your work does make salvation possible because we all agree that faith without (ALONE) works is dead. A dead faith saves no one.
You are right, a dead faith saves no one, but our works do not make salvation possible. This is consistent with the heresy of semi-Pelagianism.

Salvation is made possible only by the blood of Christ, shed for us on the cross. By becoming washed in His blood, we are made members of Him. We are empowered to complete the works that He has prepared for us, that we should walk in them. But we accomplish these works through His grace, by faith, not of ourselves. So they are not our works, but His.
Code:
From my understanding of "faith alone" as protestants seem to explain it to me the phrase should be changed to "faith first" because, in my opinion, "faith alone" doesnt sum up what protestants seem to believe.
There are many of our separated brethren that have not lost the Catholic teaching that saving faith is faith that works.
 
“Purification” does not take place in purgatory though; if this is where you are headed. There is no such place. God deals with the here and now, and purifies His saints while they are living, “for the dead know not anything.” (Eccl 9:4-5)
Protestant101, you know neither the Scriptures, nor the power of God. Those in purgatory belong to God, and He is not the God of the dead, but of the living! 😃

You are right though about one thing, God does want to purify us in the here and now.

The saints don’t die, though. In Him, they live forever, and they know Him as they are known.
 
If its a caricature its not of my making. For what reason does a person need to persevere if they are one of the “elect”? It doesnt add up no matter how you slice it.
It is called the Golden Chain of salvation. Those whom He justifies, He sanctifies, and those whom he sanctifies, he glorifies. All who are elected WILL persevere, even if they appear to fall away from the faith. The perseverance does not come from themselves, but from God, who justifies them. They do not persevere of their own ability, but only by His grace, which is able to keep them until the day of judgement.
 
Why then, does your church disregard the fourth commandment?
This is provocative and off topic, and I discourage all from responding to it. If the member wishes to discuss some other subject, the member should start another thread, or choose on that is open that is related to his interest.
 
I agree with you but the Protestant and the Baptist perspective is very strong on salvation without works. Remember sola fide? This is really what they believe. All sins, past, present and future, are forgiven at the time you are saved. You need to go back and read the Baptist Faith & Message that I quoted in Post No. 8.
I guess even some Protestants are ignorant of the many different Protestant beliefs. I am a former member of the Church of Christ. Notice the language I’ve just used. We rejected the worldly creation of “denominations” because those are man made. We believed we were members of the Lord’s church that he established. Catholics were among the earliest apostates. The Church of Christ teaches that works are part of our salvation - drawn from “faith without works is dead”. If we fail to do works we would lose our salvation. Therefore we also had the idea that one can be saved and then fall away from God - clearly scriptural. Further, we believe that the bible clearly sets aside the Lord’s day on the first day of the week since the bible clearly states that they met on the first day of the week, breaking bread. Because of this we know that the Lord’s Supper is celebrated EVERY Sunday, no exceptions. It’s eery now to see the similarity of our Church of Christ worship service in comparison to the real Church of Christ worship service, also know as the Catholic Church mass or divine liturgy. And another subject that truly bothers me is divorce. The only occasion one can divorce is rare without the possibility of losing one’s soul. Violence, infedelity are among them. But even more strict is the rules for remarriage. A man may get remarriage only if his first wife has died or committed irreconcilable adultry. Even then reconciliation is first encouraged. The spouse that cheated is doomed to live single the rest of their life, lest they lose their soul.

Now I stated these things to show you the major differences between what you describe as “Protestant” and what I describe as Protestant. Protestant is not a religion, it is an action of protesting against the Church by those that hold onto the fact that Jesus Christ is Lord and died for our sins so that we might live. The rest is where it gets blurred.

The sola fide argument does not defend your Baptist belief and that is why I never adopted my families particular Protestant faith, Southern Baptist. When I met my wife I thought I had found the one true Church Christ had founded and that I was the luckiest man alive. It wasn’t until after many years figuring things out that I realized that there were much deeper problems at stake because I’ve seen so many divisions within Protestant Churches.

All sins are forgiven. it’s just, as an example, you can have a 99% sale and unless you spend you money you will not profit from the sale. That’s why we believe in Baptism as necessary for salvation. I held that view all my life and when I hear other Protestants reject it I have to ask how could they even claim to know the bible then? It doesn’t fit the model set out by the bible. Scripture teaches that for example there are sins that are not deadly sins but need purification. But in order to be covered by the blood of the lamb we must participate in Christ’s death through our baptism and ongoing conversion.

If we fall into sin, away from God, and this too is scriptural and part of my previous faith, we must go to God and repent of our sins. But no where does the bible tell us to go only directly to Him. That is why scripture contains the example of the disciples of Christ sent out with only the cloak on their backs and to heal and forgive sins. Scripture also tells very clearly when he gave the disciples the authority to bind and loose sins.

If you are truly a bible Christian, then you should be able to recall these scriptures I’ve mentioned and have some explanation of why it doesn’t apply. I can, but now after studying history I realize the error of those previous beliefs of mine. I still heavily rely upon scripture for my faith, but I now understand the sacred scripture and the historical fact that Catholicism is the original Christian faith. I nearly fall out of my chair now when others try to disprove this with their shallow knowledge. Even though I used to try to address each issue one at a time, the recipient never cares until they are ready to accept truth in their own time. So, now I’ve stopped proselytizing and when I became Catholic realized just how foolish I had been in attempting to proselytize from my own beliefs rather than God’s belief or rather truth.
 
“Purification” does not take place in purgatory though; if this is where you are headed. There is no such place. God deals with the here and now, and purifies His saints while they are living, “for the dead know not anything.” (Eccl 9:4-5)
If a person catches a disease they are contained within a special unit within the hospital. The are in the hospital but within the confinement of the walls of the special holding facility. That is the real view of Purgatory. Purgatory is not a place but a term used to describe what happens to a soul once the person dies and is not condemned to hell. It may be a bleep of a second or a few thousand years. The fact is scripture does not describe the length of time.

Now dealing with time. God transcends time and space. I personally believe purgatory is not necessarily a long period of time, in comparison to human standards. If you studying Mind Brain theory you’ll discover that humans experience time in different ways, depending on what we are doing. As an example, I’ve learned to set a radio or television on as background noise to help me gauge how long something is taking me to do, for example, school homework or test taking at home. I experience time based on how urgent it feels.

I’m only trying to get you to understand a Catholic understanding of Purgatory, not a purposefully manipulation of Church teaching propagated by anti-Catholicism. You have a choice here…to educate yourself on the real teaching or to choose to perpetuate a lie. Which would you do? Condemn the lower class man to prison because the upper class man holds to your beliefs and standards even though the lower class man is innocent? Think about the analogy. One day you will stand before God to give an account of your sins. We all will. So please don’t continue the misrepresentations you’ve carried throughout this thread in spite of what has been written. Shoot for personal improvement, not the same ole same ole.
 
Now I stated these things to show you the major differences between what you describe as “Protestant” and what I describe as Protestant. Protestant is not a religion, it is an action of protesting against the Church by those that hold onto the fact that Jesus Christ is Lord and died for our sins so that we might live.
The term “protestare” was originally used to mean “to stand up for” or “stand up against”. It was used to describe those who denied the authority of the Apostolic succession.
 
Thats fine and I dont believe I defined works as involving money or tangible items. The question for protestants is, as a catholic is Mother Theresa saved? Would she be saved if she did the same things but was an athiest?
I did not infer that you defined works as anything… I simply wanted to make a point on a subject that seems to be misunderstood by many. On the question of Mother Theresa…this point may be moot unless someone can give an example of an atheist who actually did perform acts on a par with Mother Theresa. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top