Commandments should not be followed ...

[Odell]

I already answered you on this, Odell. That love fulfills the Law is a statement, not a stated requirement (condition) for salvation. One cannot be justified by the works of the law, nor is the believer required to “fulfill” the Law. He is brought into fellowship with God under a completely new and better covenant.

must have missed it:shrug:

You said faith fulfills the law I was just tring to find what the bible says all I got are the words of Paul who says love fulfills the law. You never said that until now.

since you answered that question could you tell me if this is the same law that is the law of Christ. “LOVE”

We both know that the law of Christ is not the same as the OT law so I was just wondering where you stand on LOVE being the law of Christ?

I’ll leave you pondering on that one.

well you have left me pondering some 200 so post ago when I first asked this question

I asked you how your faith was any different than the demons and I guess its no different.

The demons on all acounts of faith alone should be saved

Is there even a hell moondweller?

In Texas, they call that posture “all hat, no cowboy.”

I like that

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

A tree is KNOWN BY its fruit. Apart from producing apples, even an apple tree can’t know that it is an apple tree apart from producing apples. Apart from meeting God’s grace with a faith working in love we cannot judge our faith as “salvific”.
And dont misunderstand me - perhaps God makes such distinctions, but we cant - and IMHO the concept of “faith alone” which needs to be confirmed by the works of love it produces becomes a basically useless distinction.

So, according to what you are saying, our faith is judged by our works, correct?

 

[Philthy]

So Im at our monthly charismatic prayer group meeting and after a period of prayer,praise and worship we all sit around the altar and simply wait for God to speak. Sometimes people read Scripture, sometimes there is a message/prophecy, it is time of fellowship and it’s always peaceful. Im sitting and randomly flipping through my bible when the words of St Paul to the Ephesians just jolted me in its clarity.
St Paul to the Ephesians:

"So from now on, there must be no more lies. Speak the truth to one another, *[Zc 8:16] since we are all parts of one another. 26Even if you are angry, do not sin: *[Ps 4:4] never let the sun set on your anger 27or else you will give the devil a foothold. 28Anyone who was a thief must stop stealing; instead he should exert himself at some honest job with his own hands so that he may have something to share with those in need. 29No foul word should ever cross your lips; let your words be for the improvement of others, as occasion offers, and do good to your listeners; 30do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God who has marked you with his seal, ready for the day when we shall be set free. 31Any bitterness or bad temper or anger or shouting or abuse must be far removed from you-as must every kind of malice. 32Be generous to one another, sympathetic, forgiving each other as readily as God forgave you in Christ. As God’s dear children,

It is even clearer in this exchange(compared to 1st Corinthians) that Paul is speaking to Christians - “God’s dear children” - those marked with the seal of the Holy Spirit (baptized)…and he continues…
St. Paul to the Ephesian Christians:

then, take him as your pattern, 2and follow Christ by loving as he loved you, giving himself up for us as an offering and a sweet-smelling sacrifice to God. *[Ex 29:18] 3Among you there must be not even a mention of sexual vice or impurity in any of its forms, or greed: this would scarcely become the holy people of God! 4There must be no foul or salacious talk or coarse jokes-all this is wrong for you; there should rather be thanksgiving. 5For you can be quite certain that nobody who indulges in sexual immorality or impurity or greed-which is worshipping a false god-can inherit the kingdom of God.

Im sorry, but there simply is no misunderstanding this. Is there? He is addressing Christians, and what does he say? “NOBODY who indulges in sexual immorality or greed can inherit the kindgom of God” Nobody means nobody - no Pagan, no Jew and no Christian.
Unless someone is prepared to argue that “inheriting the kingdom of God” is not a reference to salvation and eternal life, then I dont see how one can dismiss the importance of the Commandments as they relate to salvation. Is anybody really gonna go there?
Perhaps what we need is a change of wording. Im a middle child and naturally seek resolution of conflicts between people.
Would it be more acceptable to any non-Catholics if someone who routinely broke the Commandments was described as “breaking faith” with Christ rather than breaking the Law/Commandments? Would that be a more palatable way of articulating why unrepentant breaking of the Commandments obviates our inheritance of the Kingdom of God since it is now an issue of faith rather than “obedience/works”?
Just looking for common ground…

 

[Philthy]

So, according to what you are saying, our faith is judged by our works, correct?

Most certainly that is the case for us judging our own faith and us judging anyone else’s faith. God, of course, may have a knowledge of our faith apart from our works and there is reason to believe this is the case. Gen 22 however seems to suggest that God learned more of Abram’s faith only after he was prepared to offer Isaac up for sacrifice.

God:

1

It happened some time later that God put Abraham to the test. “Abraham, Abraham!” he called. “Here I am,” he replied. 2God said, “Take your son, your only son, your beloved Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, where you are to offer him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I shall point out to you.”…
But the angel of Yahweh called to him from heaven. “Abraham, Abraham!” he said. “Here I am,” he replied. 12"Do not raise your hand against the boy," the angel said. “Do not harm him, for now I know you fear God. You have not refused me your own beloved son.”
Perhaps this is merely an “anthropomorphism” - a describing of God in human terms - so that we can comprehend something of Him that we otherwise could not grasp. Even if this is the case, what is the point we are supposed to get from it? Certainly one possibility is that we should behave as if our behavior determined the “content” of our faith.

God:

I swear by my own self, Yahweh declares, that because you have done this

, because you have not refused me your own beloved son, 17I will shower blessings on you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars of heaven and the grains of sand on the seashore. Your descendants will gain possession of the gates of their enemies. 18All nations on earth will bless themselves by your descendants, because you have obeyed my command."

Keeping Gods commands has always been and will always be important.

 

[guanophore]

I already answered you on this, Odell. That love fulfills the Law is a statement, not a stated requirement (condition) for salvation. One cannot be justified by the works of the law, nor is the believer required to “fulfill” the Law. He is brought into fellowship with God under a completely new and better covenant.I’ll leave you pondering on that one.

8 You do well if you really fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” James 2:8-9

" Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3 For if those who are nothing think they are something, they deceive themselves. 4 All must test their own work; then that work, rather than their neighbor’s work, will become a cause for pride. 5 For all must carry their own loads.

6 Those who are taught the word must share in all good things with their teacher.

7 Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow. 8 If you sow to your own flesh, you will reap corruption from the flesh; but if you sow to the Spirit, you will reap eternal life from the Spirit. 9 So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest time, if we do not give up. 10 So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all, and especially for those of the family of faith." Gal 6:2-10

Do you imagine that someone who sows to the flesh will still reap eternal life?

Fulfill the Law of Christ. But, it is not a requirement…

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

The Mosaic Law? Last time I checked, the Catholic Chruch was not imposing kosher laws, circumcision, new moons, etc.

What I find very interesting is that the Bible says we will be judged according to our deeds (i.e.you will reap what you sow) and yet whenever the Bible explictly discusses what that involves, it rarely talks about rewards:

John 5:28-29

**28"Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
29and will come forth; (those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. **

Romans 2:5-8

5But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:
7to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

Galatians 6:7-9

7Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.
8For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.
9Let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due time we will reap if we do not grow weary.

All of these verses expleictly deal with judgement according to works, and none of them mention anything about rewards. And when we actually see this judgement in action, again there is no mention of rewards:

Matthew 25:31-46

** 31"But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne.
32"All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats;
33and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left.
34"Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35’For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in;
36naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’**
37"Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink?
38’And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You?
39’When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’
40"The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’
41"Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
42for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink;
43I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’
44"Then they themselves also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’
45"Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’
46"These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Before this judgement seat, both the righteous * and * the wicked stand. Christ the Judge then lists the good deeds performed by the righteous. Then he hands out their rewards… oh … wait, what rewards? I’m not denying that God gives rewards, which can also be given to Christians while still on earth. But when the Bible says “judged according to works” and actually discusses the scenario, it makes no mention of rewards. It only talks about eternal life or eternal damnation.

God Bless,
Michael

Thank you.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

This is Paul’s message in a nutshell. Come on Catholics … lets get back on the target of Christian message, the spirit which gives life. The legalistic law has been removed like a monkey from our backs.

This is true as far as it means that we not under Kosher Laws, which were for the Jewish people before the Catholic Church was formed on Pentecost. But the Moral laws are there to keep us faithful to Christ if they are observed with love. And that is because they deal with MORALITY! They deal with conduct toward God and each other. We will reap what we sow. And those who do not abide by the Ten Commandments commit sin…ya know, disobedience to God’s laws?

 

[guanophore]

 But the Moral laws are there to keep us faithful to Christ if they are observed with love.  And that is because they deal with MORALITY!  They deal with conduct toward God and each other.  We will reap what we sow.  And those who do not abide by the Ten Commandments commit sin...ya know, disobedience to God's laws?

This is a good point. If sin is to miss the mark, how is one to know where the “mark” is without knowing the standards? I know that OSAS believe that sin cannot keep one out of heaven, but if one is in Christ, and one is still expected to cease from sin, how is one to know what the sins are?

 

[moondweller]

I agree that there are millions of professing Catholics out there in mortal sin. Mortal sin is not necessarily related to violation of canon law, however. In no case is Mosaic law imposed upon Catholics.

“In no case?” If by transgressing one of the 10 Commandments you commit a “mortal sin,” then, certainly in that case you have imposed its jurisdiction over you.

We are under grace, not law.

Make up your mind!

The Law provides a guide to conscience, and when one fails in love, then one violates the Law of Christ, which is the rule of life for Christians

Nice spin. Actually the purpose of the Law was to lead those under it (Jews) TO CHRIST, that when He came they would be justified by faith (Gal. 3:24). And Paul says: "Gal 3:25 "*But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.*That means not even the Jew is under the Law, and the Gentile never was.

I am sure it seems that way to people who do not understand the liberty that we have in Christ.

Paul mentions the believer’s “liberty in Christ” to warn them against those who wanted to distort the gospel of Christ and enslave them to the principle of law (see Gal. 5:1)Gal 5:12 “I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves,” says Paul.

We have been set free from the law of sin and death.

“For the law of the Spirit OF LIFE in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death,” says Paul.It’s LIFE in Christ that sets the believer free from the law of sin and death. Sin is made powerless through forgiveness (the cross), and death is made powerless by LIFE (the resurrection).“The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law,” says Paul.

We have not been given license, to behave in an unloving manner. That is what we call “cheap grace”. But we have become empowere by the Spirit to live a love worthy of the calling to which we have been called. This may seem to you “legalistic” but to those living under the law of love, it is true freedom.

Freedom from sin and judgment? I don’t think so. That comes only through faith in Christ. You, however, still impose over your head that which you believe causes your demise: The 10 Commandments, those “letters engraved on stones,” which Paul delineates a "ministry of death and condemnation (2 Cor. 3:5-9).

Tradition is not a dirty word.

But tradition can certainly dirty up the Word. Jesus had to spend a lot of time during His earthly ministry having to correct that which was imposed upon the people according to tradition. And He corrected it by Scripture.

I thought you didn’t believe in purgatory.

LOL. The “fire” is revelatory, not “purgatory.”

 

[sandusky]

Teflon93:

Such as the Eucharist, another of Christ’s commandments which must be followed lest we have no life within us:

1 Corinthians 11:

23": For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

“24”: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

“25”: After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

“26”: For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.

“27”: Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

“28”: But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

“29”: For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

“30”: For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

You stopped short of one of the most powerful statements by Paul concerning the impossibility of a believer losing his justification, and thus, his salvation.

First, the KJV translation of the Greek word ”krima” in v29 is inaccurate. Rather than being translated “damnation,” it is better translated ”judgment” (see your Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible for that more accurate translation.)

Judgment can be seen to be more accurate than damnation by the verses that follow:**1 Corinthians 11:31-34

31 But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged.

32 But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord…**Verse 32 is key to accurately understanding what Paul is saying.

The illnesses, and death that result from believers having partaken of the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner are ”paideuō,” or discipline/chastisement by the Lord, and not damnation
(cf the Lord’s words in Jn 5:24).

The next word in the second clause of verse 32 above is the Greek word ”hina,” translated sometimes as “in order that,” but most often, as in this case, SO THAT.

The clause subsequent to the word hina is referred to as a “hina clause,” in English, a purpose clause, in that it states the purpose of the antecedent clause(s).

In the case of verse 32, the reason for the discipline of the Lord for some who partake of the Supper unworthily; namely illness and death, is ”SO THAT we will not be condemned along with the world.”

Notice that Paul in using the plural pronoun humbly includes himself in that “hina clause”
as well.

Therefore, we see that God keeps His people from condemnation not only by decree, but by divine intervention as well. He chastens His to keep them from falling from salvation, even to the point of taking their life before that could happen.

That’s Pure Grace.

I’m grateful that Christ is so much greater a savior than I am a sinner; are you?33 So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another.

34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment. The remaining matters I will arrange when I come.

 

[moondweller]

Yes, she was, and thankfully is now in the Church Christ founded.

But she can still answer your question, right?

Not based on your inability to respond to Matthew 5, Matthew 25, and others. The Scriptures are certainly sufficient, but your interpretation is incoherent, inconsistent, and utterly lacking.

Well, based on that then my response would be futile, wouldn’t it? Like pearls to swine.

You most certainly have not.

Oh I have. Just not to your ability to comprehend.

such as my repeatedly asking whether or not you believe Christ to be one in being with God. Do you?

Most certainly.

I would, provided they knew Sunday Mass was obligatory and missing it without sound cause a sin.

Legalism LOVES its loopholes.

I don’t know why you think one needs to grow up in a Catholic neighborhood to know people who stay out late drinking. I live in the Bible Belt and there is no shortage of Baptists who do the same down here, particularly children of pastors.

Baptist are not required to report to Sunday Mass under penalty of a “mortal sin.”

[particularly since you’ll also have to show that none of these got to Confession either. Not to mention the “full knowledge and consent” thing.

There again, the legalists and their beloved loopholes.

No wonder you’re so terrible at identifying the saved!

Do you even have any idea what the word means?

In addition to not reading my posts and not reading the Catechism, you haven’t read my profile. I’m an Air Force Academy graduate and spent 9 years in the Air Force. I seriously doubt you’re going to out-discipline me, especially given your histrionic and undisciplined use of the English language.

I’m not talking military style discipline. I was in, I know what that’s all about. Tef., is pride a sin?

Whoops, there I go with hate-filled diatribes again!

And you who believe you’re “saved” (if you know what that means) by your acts of love.

You would know all about legalism, not having the benefit of the freedom offered through the sacraments.

You mean the freedom to sin and confess, sin and confess, sin and confess, sin and confess. Kind of like the military, disciplined during the day, rowdy and ungoverned at night.

It is not what I believe which you had better worry about, brother.

I worry about what you don’t believe.

What makes you think I’ll be standing alone? Haven’t you read Matthew 25 yet, after all the references? As Christ notes there, works of love will be what determines our fate.

Well, then you do have a lot to worry about.

I hope that love will be awakened within you, brother, and that you will be standing with me on that glorious day.

You’re confident you’ll be considered a “sheep?” As to that separation, sorry, I won’t be there. Doesn’t pertain to me.
[/quote]

 

[guanophore]

“In no case?” If by transgressing one of the 10 Commandments you commit a “mortal sin,” then, certainly in that case you have imposed its jurisdiction over you.

No, moon. The fact that the Commandments reflect the moral expectations God has of mankind does not place us under the jurisdiction of the old covenant. God’s moral expectation of man has not changed, before, during, or after the Mosaic covenant. Christ was clear that love is the fulfilling of the Law. When we fail to keep the commandments, we have failed in love, under which rule we now stand.

Not only that, the Mosaic Covenant did not distinguish between mortal and venial sins.

Make up your mind!

It is not “my mind”. This is the Apostolic faith that has been taught since Jesus commissioned them. The presence of grace does not nullify the standards according to which we act. Love fulfills the Law. It does not erase the standard of conduct.

Nice spin. Actually the purpose of the Law was to lead those under it (Jews) TO CHRIST, that when He came they would be justified by faith (Gal. 3:24). And Paul says: "Gal 3:25 "But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.That means not even the Jew is under the Law, and the Gentile never was.

Well, I fail to understand your complaint, then. If we agree that we are not under the jurisdiction of the law, then

It is BECAUSE we are justified by faith that we are able to fulfill the Law. It is the love of God, shed abroad in our hearts that enables us to love others as He has loved us.

Paul mentions the believer’s “liberty in Christ” to warn them against those who wanted to distort the gospel of Christ and enslave them to the principle of law (see Gal. 5:1)Gal 5:12 “I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves,” says Paul.“For the law of the Spirit OF LIFE in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death,” says Paul.It’s LIFE in Christ that sets the believer free from the law of sin and death. Sin is made powerless through forgiveness (the cross), and death is made powerless by LIFE (the resurrection).“The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law,” says Paul.

Right…

Freedom from sin and judgment? I don’t think so. That comes only through faith in Christ. You, however, still impose over your head that which you believe causes your demise: The 10 Commandments, those “letters engraved on stones,” which Paul delineates a "ministry of death and condemnation (2 Cor. 3:5-9).

The wages of sin have not changed, moon. The wages of sin have always been death. Paul makes it clear that those who sin will not inherit the Kingdom. The fact that we are not under the Law does not change the ministry of the Law. To the extent that persons fail in faith, they have not fulfilled the Law of Christ, which can only be filled by grace, through faith. God at work in us to will and to do His good pleasure is how the commandments can be kept by the Christian. Some persons, however, call themselves Christians but do not fulfill the Law of Love. Those persons obviously still need a tutor, since they have not arrived at the fullness of faith. Those who are of God do not sin.

LOL. The “fire” is revelatory, not “purgatory.”

For Catholics, there is no difference. He burns off the dross so that the glory of Himself can shine through us.

 

[Pax]

Well, Pax, I am still waiting for you to show me where, in Scripture, it is recorded that God actually justifies Abraham as He did in Gen. 15:6. So far you have only asserted it. I simply cannot rely on your word. Both Paul and James cite only ONE occasion: Gen. 15:6. Yet you insist on two others. You own a Bible, please provide me with the quotes.

Either you haven’t read my posts or you choose to ignore the scriptural data within them.

Please read the scriptural data I gave and then provide your own exegesis. Ignoring it won’t help you.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Philthy;3954411:

Not free in what sense - is there an eternal consequence to breaking the law with impunity?

My pastor discussed this issue last night. He said that we run the risk of our consciences being seared and having our dearest possessions, family members, health, and even life taken from us but that there are no eternal repercussions except loss of rewards (i.e. crowns to lay at Christ’s feet). Oh, and where you live in heaven could be affected as well.

Okay, let me get this straight. Once you have been saved, if you commit a sin, God will punish you on earth by taking the life of a family member? WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT EVEN REMOTELY HINT AT SUCH A THING???
Even when God let a punishment reach down into the next generations, He was not punishing the one who committed the sin by taking away the people he loved.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

So Im at our monthly charismatic prayer group meeting and after a period of prayer,praise and worship we all sit around the altar and simply wait for God to speak. Sometimes people read Scripture, sometimes there is a message/prophecy, it is time of fellowship and it’s always peaceful. Im sitting and randomly flipping through my bible when the words of St Paul to the Ephesians just jolted me in its clarity.

It is even clearer in this exchange(compared to 1st Corinthians) that Paul is speaking to Christians - “God’s dear children” - those marked with the seal of the Holy Spirit (baptized)…and he continues…

Im sorry, but there simply is no misunderstanding this. Is there? He is addressing Christians, and what does he say? “NOBODY who indulges in sexual immorality or greed can inherit the kindgom of God” Nobody means nobody - no Pagan, no Jew and no Christian.
Unless someone is prepared to argue that “inheriting the kingdom of God” is not a reference to salvation and eternal life, then I dont see how one can dismiss the importance of the Commandments as they relate to salvation. Is anybody really gonna go there?
Perhaps what we need is a change of wording. Im a middle child and naturally seek resolution of conflicts between people.
Would it be more acceptable to any non-Catholics if someone who routinely broke the Commandments was described as “breaking faith” with Christ rather than breaking the Law/Commandments? Would that be a more palatable way of articulating why unrepentant breaking of the Commandments obviates our inheritance of the Kingdom of God since it is now an issue of faith rather than “obedience/works”?
Just looking for common ground…

That was great!!! I’m a blessed member of the Charasmatic Movement myself. Isn’t is awesome! God knows what He is talking about when we care enought to listen. And when we listen, He always talks. God bless you.

 

[Pax]

You stopped short of one of the most powerful statements by Paul concerning the impossibility of a believer losing his justification, and thus, his salvation.

First, the KJV translation of the Greek word ”krima” in v29 is inaccurate. Rather than being translated “damnation,” it is better translated ”judgment” (see your Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible for that more accurate translation.)

Judgment can be seen to be more accurate than damnation by the verses that follow:1 Corinthians 11:31-34

31 But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged.

32 But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord…Verse 32 is key to accurately understanding what Paul is saying.

The illnesses, and death that result from believers having partaken of the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner are ”paideuō,” or discipline/chastisement by the Lord, and not damnation
(cf the Lord’s words in Jn 5:24).

The next word in the second clause of verse 32 above is the Greek word ”hina,” translated sometimes as “in order that,” but most often, as in this case, SO THAT.

The clause subsequent to the word hina is referred to as a “hina clause,” in English, a purpose clause, in that it states the purpose of the antecedent clause(s).

In the case of verse 32, the reason for the discipline of the Lord for some who partake of the Supper unworthily; namely illness and death, is ”SO THAT we will not be condemned along with the world.”

Notice that Paul in using the plural pronoun humbly includes himself in that “hina clause”
as well.

Therefore, we see that God keeps His people from condemnation not only by decree, but by divine intervention as well. He chastens His to keep them from falling from salvation, even to the point of taking their life before that could happen.

That’s Pure Grace.

I’m grateful that Christ is so much greater a savior than I am a sinner; are you?33 So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another.

34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that you will not come together for judgment. The remaining matters I will arrange when I come.

I’m sorry but neither of us is a Greek scholar. This is a linguistic spin on your part. The committees that translate scripture generally do a very good job. Many bibles use the terms damnation or condemnation and they do so because it fits the meaning of the Greek and it fits the context.

I’ll take the translations of these scholarly groups over yours or mine any day of the week.

No offense intended. I’m sure that your efforts are sincere. I think they are, unfortunately, influenced by your theology as opposed to a clear understanding of the language.

 

[guanophore]

Therefore, we see that God keeps His people from condemnation not only by decree, but by divine intervention as well. He chastens His to keep them from falling from salvation, even to the point of taking their life before that could happen.

If it cannot happen in the first place, then what is the point of all that?

You are saying in the same sentence that it is possible to fall from salvation, but that God won’t let it happen.

 

[LutheranDK]

This post was taken from the thread “Your works gospel prevents you from understanding what God Himself achieved.” In that thread, Catholics were asserting that keeping the commandments is part of God’s plan of salvation.

Such a statement seems to me to be “cheap grace”, in the sense that it presents a false “liberty” that sets aside God’s standards, and promotes the notion that one can “sin boldly” as one is under grace.

This is cheep grace indeed.
Not because of the first part “The 10 commandments should not be followed in order to be saved”, but because of the latter part.

The Law is still in effect - as a guide to the Christian on how to live his life to please God. But NOT as the road to salvation.
You cannot work your way into Paradise - but that does not mean that you do not need to do good works…

 

[Mannyfit75]

This is cheep grace indeed.
Not because of the first part “The 10 commandments should not be followed in order to be saved”, but because of the latter part.

The Law is still in effect - as a guide to the Christian on how to live his life to please God. But NOT as the road to salvation.
You cannot work your way into Paradise - but that does not mean that you do not need to do good works…

To please God is to OBEY the commandments. You do it out of love.

When Jesus comes in glory, he will separate good and evil. He will sent those evil ones to hell, while the good is sent to heaven. How does he judge us in those final days? He will judge us by our actions, deeds. We are NOT judge by God through “FAITH ALONE.”

 

[Teflon93]

But she can still answer your question, right?

She not only can, but has, and confirmed what I posted.

Well, based on that then my response would be futile, wouldn’t it? Like pearls to swine.

Your response might be futile, but would be illuminating for you.

Oh I have. Just not to your ability to comprehend.

You have not, as anyone reviewing the links can see. Am I not your brother, Moondweller? Do you love me?

Most certainly.

FINALLY—an answer! Moondweller is a Trinitarian.

Then are God’s Commandments not Christ’s?

Legalism LOVES its loopholes.

Binding and loosing authority are anything but loopholes. We do as Christ commands us to do; this includes confessing our sins and repenting of them.

Baptist are not required to report to Sunday Mass under penalty of a “mortal sin.”

Actually, they are. Baptists are disobedient; some are invincibly ignorant and thus cannot have the full knowledge and consent which makes sins mortal. Hopefully the Lord will be merciful to those who are not in full communion with Him through the Church He founded.

There again, the legalists and their beloved loopholes.

There again, the disobedience and lack of concern for one’s fellow Christians. Perhaps you simply root for the damnation of millions of Catholics. You certainly seem ill-disposed toward the Jews in your despising those who follow the Law which God gave them.

Do you even have any idea what the word means?

Since exposure to the Catechism is important for you, and since you struggle so with common English definitions, here is the Church’s definition:
I. “LORD, LOOK UPON THE FAITH OF YOUR CHURCH”

168 It is the Church that believes first, and so bears, nourishes and sustains my faith. Everywhere, it is the Church that first confesses the Lord: “Throughout the world the holy Church acclaims you”, as we sing in the hymn “Te Deum”; with her and in her, we are won over and brought to confess: “I believe”, “We believe”. It is through the Church that we receive faith and new life in Christ by Baptism. In the Rituale Romanum, the minister of Baptism asks the catechumen:** “What do you ask of God’s Church?” And the answer is: “Faith.” “What does faith offer you?” “Eternal life.”**54

169 Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: "We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation."55 Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.

The how:

456 With the Nicene Creed, we answer by confessing: “For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven; by the power of the Holy Spirit, he became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and was made man.”

457 The Word became flesh for us in order to save us by reconciling us with God, who “loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins”: “the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world”, and **“he was revealed to take away sins”:**70

Sick, our nature demanded to be healed; fallen, to be raised up; dead, to rise again. We had lost the possession of the good; it was necessary for it to be given back to us. Closed in the darkness, it was necessary to bring us the light; captives, we awaited a Savior; prisoners, help; slaves, a liberator. Are these things minor or insignificant? Did they not move God to descend to human nature and visit it, since humanity was in so miserable and unhappy a state?71

458 The Word became flesh so that thus we might know God’s love: "In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him."72 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."73

459 The Word became flesh to be our model of holiness: “Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me.” "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me."74 On the mountain of the Transfiguration, the Father commands: "Listen to him!"75 Jesus is the model for the Beatitudes and the norm of the new law: "Love one another as I have loved you."76 This love implies an effective offering of oneself, after his example.77

460** The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”:**78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81

I’m not talking military style discipline. I was in, I know what that’s all about.

Then you should acknowledge your error in claiming that I mock anyone who leads a disciplined kind of life, rather than change the subject. Read your signature line.

Tef., is pride a sin?

Pride is a sin. How will you repent, having rejected the need to confess your sins and do penance?

Moreover, how do you know pride to be a sin? I know because the Church has so defined it, based upon Scripture and Tradition.

And you who believe you’re “saved” (if you know what that means) by your acts of love.

Pride is a sin, Moondweller. I don’t believe I am “saved”—I believe I have been saved, am being saved, and hope fervently that I will be saved. I believe because Christ tells me so, through Scripture and through the Church he founded. You have seen the overwhelming Scriptural evidence regarding the need to love, Moondweller. Why do you continue to reject it? Is it that hard to love?

You mean the freedom to sin and confess, sin and confess, sin and confess, sin and confess. Kind of like the military, disciplined during the day, rowdy and ungoverned at night.

And now you mock the service you claim to have been a part of. The freedom to bind and loose is well-attested in Scripture, it was given by Christ to the Apostles. You might wish to read more of the Gospel.

Lest anyone who has not served in the military be led astray, there is no such thing as someone in the service being “ungoverned at night”. I was an officer, and can assure you that the Uniform Code of Military Justice and all regulations applied after dark as well as before it. It apparently wasn’t to your taste, and as we’ve seen with your approach to Scripture, you treat your own taste as Law.

I worry about what you don’t believe.

Well, worrying for me is a start! I welcome your concern, brother, and perhaps one day you will return mine.

Well, then you do have a lot to worry about.

Not at all—I have the Church and its sacraments to aid me. I will continue to grow in love thanks to them, and the examples of my brothers and sisters within the true Church. I am sorry that you don’t believe that I correct you in love, brother. I am weighing withdrawing from this discussion for that very reason—you seem to take this personally; and may simply discount the evidence I offer because I offer it. It may be better to allow my brothers and sisters to continue.

You’re confident you’ll be considered a “sheep?”

Confident but never certain. “Fear and trembling”, you know. I cannot predict the future, I can only hope to continue to avoid sin or the near occasion of it, to confess and repent when I do not, and to continue to love and grow in love and the good works which are the fruit of it as Christ bids me do. If I perservere to the end, I have no doubt I’ll hear that glorious “Well done, thou good and faithful servant”. If I do not, I will be cast into the outer darkness, and will deserve to be so.

As to that separation, sorry, I won’t be there. Doesn’t pertain to me.

I’m sorry to hear that, and hope it won’t be the case. I will continue to pray for you, brother.