Faith alone or not?

[Cat_Herder]

I hope everyone wakes up and realizes MoonDweller is dead on accurate. Justification by God; another wonderful gift cannot be missed by a serious believer and student of Scripture and lover of God. If it is not by faith alone, then what is it by?

The GRACE of God.

Only God can save. Faith alone cannot save. Works alone cannot save. Works and faith apart from God’s grace cannot save.

Salvation is a gift freely given by God, but it has a string attached. A string called the Holy Spirit, Who draws the sinner along the path of conversion, conformity to the life of Christ (aka good works). The sinner can, however, choose to let go of this string. That is called mortal sin.

Please, no more polemics about how Catholics work their way into salvation.

 

[panevino]

Originally Posted by Calvin 95 View Post
…So if… anyone is waiting or hoping or counting on assisting and cooperating with God in making oneself righteous before He will save; it will be a very long wait; like eternity and that person does not have a key doctrine dealing with salvation correct and that is very very thin ice…

rev 3:20Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

 

[ncgolf]

I hope everyone wakes up and realizes MoonDweller is dead on accurate. Justification by God; another wonderful gift cannot be missed by a serious believer and student of Scripture and lover of God.

Please. To use Moon’s terminology a “true believer” would not believe “faith alone”.

If it is not by faith alone, then what is it by? Faith and works? Faith and cross your fingers and hope not to die?

For such a dogmatic position using “faith alone” you will not find faith and alone in the exact combination you stated in Scripture.

This means that what you glean out of Scripture is done by study and interpretation since your dogma is not stated in those terms. What you ask is one trust you that through some human means you have correctly identified what the author intended, that being “faith alone”. It is much better put that the concept in terms of what Scripture does say and that is “by grace through faith”.

If you have read some of Moon’s previous posts you will see he sticks in a (alone) every once in a while in that verse.

Wouldn’t it have crossed Paul’s mind that if it was “by grace through faith alone” he would have written it?

 

[paul_c]

I hope everyone wakes up and realizes MoonDweller is dead on accurate.

have you been following this thread at all?

Justification by God; another wonderful gift cannot be missed by a serious believer and student of Scripture and lover of God. If it is not by faith alone, then what is it by? Faith and works? Faith and cross your fingers and hope not to die?

So Calvin, obviously you have not read the last several days worth of posts. There are all kinds of things required to go to heaven, among them are the following:

• Faith (I know you want argue this point)
• Following the commandments (Matthew 19)
• Doing works of Mercy (Matthew 25)
• Eating Jesus body and Drinking his blood (John 6)
• Getting Baptized (Acts 2, 1 Peter 1)

If someone tries to comeback with James 2; then that person shows further ignorance of Scripture and of what James is affirming and will have to explain away Paul in some twisted manner because that person will put James in conflict with Paul. If that were the case then burn your Bible; it is worthless.

Why do you say this? Paul says that you can not be saved by Works alone
James clarifies by Saying you can’t be saved by Faith alone either, you need works.

And as or the other Calvinistic heresy that entrance into heaven is predestined: See what Jesus says to the Sadduccees who challenged him on the resurrection in Luke 20:
34 Jesus said to them, "The children of this age marry and remarry;
35 but those who are deemed worthy to attain to the coming age and to the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage.

Note very carefully that you must be WORTHY of going to heaven, which clearly says that there is personal merit involved.

And remember what St. Paul says in Romans 2:
5 By your stubbornness and impenitent heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God,
6 who will repay everyone according to his works:
7 eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works,
8 but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness.
9 Yes, affliction and distress will come upon every human being who does evil, Jew first and then Greek.
10 But there will be glory, honor, and peace for everyone who does good, Jew first and then Greek.

It can’t be any more clear than this. you will be judged on your works and the reward IS eternal life. Now Paul doesn’t mean that you will be judged on works alone. He spends the next few chapters of Romans explaining that Faith in Jesus is also required and that works alone won’t save (which you misinterpret as saying that ALL that is required is Faith - This is because you don’t know scripture- the same charge Jesus levies against the sadduccees, who believed scripture said that there would be no resurrection). James and Paul are completely aligned on this. It would be you who would separate them.

 

[paul_c]

Name one person who was righteous before Jesus stated your faith has made you well; always spiritually and sometimes both physically & spiritually. Consider this, did Jesus say He came to save the sinner or the righteous? He commented on both sides; so who should we believe? Jesus perhaps? When Jesus made these statements; one can bet they were truly saved and were in the Kingdom as soon as He said it; just as the thief on the cross.

Mark 2:17 And hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; **I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” **

Matthew 9:10-13 "Then it happened that as Jesus was reclining at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were dining with Jesus and His disciples. 11 When the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, “Why is your Teacher eating with the tax collectors and sinners?” 12 But when Jesus heard this, He said, "It is not those who are healthy (righteous-mine) who need a physician, but those who are sick (unrighteous-mine). 13 “But go and learn what this means: ‘I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT SACRIFICE,’ for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Romans 5:8-10 **But God demonstrates ****His ****own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ **died for us.9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath {of God} through Him. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. **<-- the saved is explained above; in this context it is saved from what? The wrath of God. **

So if anyone is waiting or hoping or counting on assisting and cooperating with God in making oneself righteous before He will save; it will be a very long wait; like eternity and that person does not have a key doctrine dealing with salvation correct and that is very very thin ice.

I cannot imagine getting the doctine of propitiation wrong? "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; – 1John

In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. – 1John

What was Jesus actively bearing and saving the unrighteous from? Sin and the penalty,which is eternal wrath? What can we contribute to the imputation of His righteousnes to the ungodly sinner? Nothing.

All of faith, which He Himself graciously gave for nothing & paid a hefty price; just because He wanted to & was able to and for His glory. Praise you Jesus; praise you and thank you Father!

Calvin, you obviously don’t understand Catholic Sotierology so let me explain.

Jesus did indeed come to call all sinners to himself. This is done as a complete gift, no matter what we deserve by our actions. In fact, God is constantly calling us to himself through conscience. The more we sin, the louder he calls. But we must respond positively to be saved and this done through both faith and love. This is done initially through the sacrament of baptism, which is a sign of our covenant relationship with God, Through baptism, we are cleansed of our previous sins, brought into the state of grace, and made a permanent member of Christ’s church. This is why there is only one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. On our part, we agree to do God’s will by loving God and neighbors and avoiding Serious sin. As long as we do so, we stay in the state of Grace. We can enhance god’s grace withing us by partaking of the eucharist, by which we increasingly become one with Christ by consuming his body and blood. And as grace within us becomes stronger, it becomes increasingly easy to do his will. All good works done by us are done by cooperating with God’s will. Jesus told us how to follow God’s will through his words and actions, and by giving us the Holy Spirit within us to lead us (acting through our conscience) While it all comes from God, there is merit in cooperating with him. If you aren’t doing good works, then you aren’t doing the will of the Father. This much should be obvious.

However, we can lose God’s grace as well, by turning from him through sin. Mortal sin is serious enough for us to actually separate ourselves from God. However, even when we do this, God continues to call to us through our conscience. If we respond positively, we can renew our convenant with God through the sacrament of reconciliation. by taking this step and confessing our sins to a priest representing Jesus Christ, our sins can be absolved and we can return to the state of Grace. This is through God’s mercy and despite our sinful actions.

If we end our life in the state of Grace, we will go to heaven. However, you can be in the state of grace and still be stained with the propensity to sin. If this is the case, you will be purified of this tendency in Purgatory prior to heaven, because nothing impure will enter the presence of God in heaven.

So you see. Getting to heaven does indeed start with Faith. But it also requires Baptism, the eucharist, doing works of mercy,loving God and others, following the commandments and repenting sacramentally adn most of all persistence in doing so through out our lives.

 

[guanophore]

Tradition of men.

Christ has total power to save and he exercises it when someone is baptized into His Body. However, humans have free will and as with any gift, salvation can be forefeited. None of that has anything to do with “earning” salvation.

Ours is a grace based religion in which we rely on Jesus Christ and OBEY Him for our salvation. We do the best we can; He supplies the rest through grace.

Your religion is based on your own intelligence; you think that you will be saved because you are supposedly smarter than the Catholic Church, which has been around much longer than you or your church.

If that is not true then why are you here trying to tell us that we are wrong? We have faith in Christ; aren’t we then saved just as you are? No, you will say; you have to see it MY WAY in order to be saved. See how you are putting human conditions on salvation, doing the very thing of which you accuse the Church?

Great post herder! It is truly a delight to watch you slice through the fallacies of Calvanism as presented on this forum by MD. I pray that every Catholic will become as solid as you are in your understanding of the Apostolic faith.

You make a very good point here that MD is right, our religion is not “faith based”, but “grace based”. All that we are, and all that we have exists through His Grace and Mercy, including our faith.

I have been musing the past few days on the notions of Calvin as presented by MD and others on this Board who have been infected with his thought. I wonder how much of his ideas were influenced by the fact that he was a lawyer before he decided to try to reinvent the faith?

 

[guanophore]

While it is true that your interpretation of "salvation by faith alone" doesnt fit my soteriology, that is not at all why I wish to avoid discussing verses of Scripture dealing with salvation.  The reason, which I have already given you, is that when we use the word salvation we mean different things.  I believe that salvation has a beginning and an end with respect to our mortal lives and that we can, after being "saved" by receiving the word with joy and believing, believe only for a time and fall away in time of trial and subsequently lose our inheritance in the Kingdom of God.  And so each time you point to verses that speak of "salvation" you assume they apply not only to the point in time that we come to faith in Christ, but that they apply with respect to our inheriting the KOG; while I do not.  And so, it is quite useful to discuss those verses that deal with going to Heaven/inheriting the KOG directly as they should, if your soteriology is correct, say the same things about our inheritance as they do about being "saved".  I resubmit that they do not and that inheriting the KOG is never spoken of as by faith alone.  Further, not only are those verses absent, but the verses we do have contradict such a soteriology IMHO.  Anyhow, that is why I am sticking to verses with "inheriting the KOG" in them...it eliminates and obviates our unresolved differences on the meaning and implications of the term "saved".  Fair enough?

Very well stated, and quite accurate.

This is one of the main functions of Sacred Tradition - to help us understand the meanings of the terms in context. Your perception is consistent with the Apostolic Faith because when you read the passages, you do so from the point of view of those who wrote them.

You are correct that there is a big difference, but not in the context of the discussion we are having. The point is that because believers still “have the flesh” and will commit the same sins as unbelievers, your claim that Paul was identifying unbelievers by listing the sinful behaviors they commit makes no sense. That’s the point MD. Your position doesnt make sense because all of the sins committed by sinners are committed by believers and therefore you cannot distinguish them by their sins. But Paul does distinguish those who “inherit the kingdom of God” from those who do not by certain (unrepentant) sinful behaviors. It doesnt make sense if that inheritance is by faith alone and I cannot ignore those sections of Scripture that clearly call that soteriology into question. Furthermore, he should, if your faith alone soteriology were true, identify them as being “unbelieving” or “faithless” or some such term. But he does not. He says that NO ONE who commits such sins (unrepentantly) has any inheritance in the KOG.
Thank you for “stating the facts” and not resorting to ad hominem attacks.
Like I said, MD, if this were the case then Paul would not identify unbelievers by pointing to their sinful behavior, but by pointing to their unbelief. But he doesnt, he points to behavior and says it excludes you from inheriting the kingdom. I agree with you though, Paul didn’t misspeak.
Many who consider themselves believers, who profess Jesus as their Lord and Savior, because they still “have the flesh” have fallen into idolatry.

Clearly Paul is writing his letters addressed to the believers, to be read in the Churches.

Reformers look back into history and imagine that the first century congregations contained the same mix of believers and unbelievers as they do today. They don’t realize that attending Church back then brought the possibillity of the death penalty.

You seem angry and frustrated. I’m sorry if what God puts on my heart from these Scriptures and in this discussion upsets you so much. I will simply say that the inheritance is imperishable because of it’s source: Christ. Our participation in it, however, is not until we have completed this life faithfully. We are protected by God through faith, but if we lose our faith - which happens all the time when people fall into sin - then we lose our protection and our inheritance as well.

This is a lie and you know it.

Blessings!

Phil, I just had to respond to this very courteous and compassionate post. I have been down with the flu for a few days, and watched a number of old war movies, which I do from time to time. I read this post when my mind was still aching from man’s inhumanity to man, impressed with the vastness of the prejudice, fear, and hostility that we can have for one another. Your response to those attitudes in this post was so refreshing it was a joy to read. May we all be able to respond with such compassion for those who bear such hatred against the Church founded by Christ. And may that compassion open their eyes to see that which has been blocked out by darkness. As you have correctly noted, the darkness comes from that Father of Lies, our ancient foe.

 

[Philthy]

guanophore:
Phil, I just had to respond to this very courteous and compassionate post. …Your response to those attitudes in this post was so refreshing it was a joy to read.

Because it comes from you and because of the tremendous respect I have for you, this compliment means a lot to me. Thank you!

Get well!

 

[guanophore]

  (**1**) I don't see any place where Jesus "*I give you the POWER to forgive post-baptismal* sins."  He said: "John 20:23 "*If you forgive the sins of any, {their sins} have been* forgiven them; if you retain the {sins} of any, they have been retained."  There's no giving of POWER there, nor does it state ANYTHING about "post-baptismal"sins.  At best this forgiveness of sins is connected with their ministry of **proclaiming the forgiveness of sins** through personal faith in Jesus Christ:Acts 10:43 "*Of Him all the prophets bear witness that **through His name everyone who believes*** in Him receives forgiveness of sins."

Of course you could not let yourself see any power to forgive in that passage. lest your theology crumble, and you would have to concede that the Church founded by Christ is, indeed, Catholic. In this case, however, the “power” rests in the authority that He is giving. He gives this power to His Apostles.

And again, we see the difficulty that results from trying to extract doctrine from a few verses of scripture. The fact that this passage does not reference “post baptismal” sins is irrelevant. The Apostles believed and taught that baptism washes away all sins, so the person emerging from the bath of regeneration completely pure. In such cases, there is no further need for any forgiveness. If we could all maintain that newborn state of purity throughout our lives, there would be no further need of absolution. But, since we do fall, He is faithful and just, and provides a means by which we may be yet purified again.

  Acts 13:38 "*Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that **through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you***,"(**2**) So, I'll ask you, can you show me in the Scriptures where men lined up before the Apostles to confess their sins to hear them say (after some sort of "*penance*"), "*I have absolved your sins?*"  Or, "*Your sins are retained, I refuse to absolve them?*"

You have it backwards, MD, the Absolution comes first, then the penance.

Any attempt by a person to make reparation for an unconfessed sin would be, as you constantly point out, “works based salvation”. Only God’s grace can forgive our sins. Once forgiven, we can then, by grace, through faith, bear the fruits that befit repentance.

  how many of your sins has your confessor retained?

I think we would agree that even one would close the door of heaven to a person. Nothing unclean can enter.

Sins are retained if they are not repented of by the penitent. For example, the Aposlte Peter retained the sins of Ananias and Sapphira, because they did not have a repentant heart. As Scripture states “you have lied to the HS”. The consquence was immediate and severe, to show the Church that hiding ones sins is not worth the price.

It doesn’t say that He breathed on them in order to have that power. It, in fact, states nothing about a transference of power.

I agree, He breathed on them to receive the HS. If you think there is no power involved when one recieves the HS, then you are suffering a very deficient experience of Christianity.

Jesus empowered HIs Aposltes by giving them authority on earth to forgive sins. This ministry is also a work of the HS, and by His power it occurs.

The ministry of the Holy Spirit during this church age is not to forgive sins:John 16:7-9 “But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment; concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me;”

Indeed, this is one of the ministries of the HS, but there are many. He also cleanses us from all sins in baptism, by completing the “circumcision made without hands” which presents to God from us a clear conscience. He purifies, sanctifies, and guides the Church. The HS has many ministries in the Church. God has given the the Church the ministry to forgive sins.

I do not deny either Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit. You bear false witness.

Only so far as they exist within the Catholic Church, apparently.

 

[Philthy]

Name one person who was righteous before Jesus stated your faith has made you well;

Abraham, Ezekiel, Elijah, Zechariah, Simeone were all referred to as “righteous” or “blameless” before God and they were declared so before Jesus spoke those words. I dont get you point however, as it relates to the topic. You seem to be confused regarding my soteriology, somehow imagining that I believe one must be righteous of their own accord in order to enter the KOG. I never said that however, and you never articulated that this is what you were commenting on, but apparently you are assuming that it is obvious and that we all know what your point is without you having told us.

When Jesus made these statements; one can bet they were truly saved and were in the Kingdom as soon as He said it; just as the thief on the cross.

The thief was clearly no “in the kingdom” otherwise Christ would not have said, “…you will be with me in paradise.” This is also irrelevant.

Mark 2:17 And hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; **I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” **

We are in agreement here; what’s your point?

I cannot imagine getting the doctrine of propitiation wrong? "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. – 1John

Actually, Jesus is the propitiation for the whole world. We know that because the same author tells us in John 3:16 that “For God so loved the world, that he sent his only Son…” And yet we know that not everyone who Christ died for actually goes to Heaven, do they? Therefore, despite the fact that Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the world, that alone, will not allow them all to inherit the KOG.
So what is the difference between those who will go to Heaven(ie inherit the KOG) and those who do not? That’s the topic of this thread at this point. One thing we know for sure, however, is that no one goes to Heaven by having a perfect propitiation for their sins alone, and that renders your intended point invalid.

What was Jesus actively bearing and saving the unrighteous from? Sin and the penalty,which is eternal wrath? What can we contribute to the imputation of His righteousnes to the ungodly sinner? Nothing.

Baloney. Faith is a minimum requirement. The question is whether there is anything else we must add. Have you read all the posts up til now? Your comments don’t reflect it.
If you would like to comment on something that MD seems to be avoiding or perhaps is merely unable to respond at this time, then why not address my post 644 which very succinctly summarizes a small section of Galatians where Paul tells saved believers that if they “submit again” to the law, then they have “separated themselves” from Christ, and they have “fallen from grace” Im particularly interested in hearing your spin on the term “fallen from grace” - what does it mean in the context of the letter?

Blessings!

 

[guanophore]

The correct answer is no for the wages of sin is death.

Let us take a look at a word that Moondweller constantly refers to in his attempt to justify his position regarding eternal security. That word is theopneustos. The English term inspiration comes from St. Jerome’s Vulgate translation of a word in 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is inspired by God (Vulgate, divinus inspirata for the Greek, theopneustos - “God breathed” or “the breath of God”) and is useful for teaching the truth, rebuking error, correcting faults, and giving instruction for right living.”

Bearing the above in mind, let us now look at some other passages from Scripture.

First, the power to forgive sins was promised to the Apostles and their successors. Speaking to Peter alone, Christ says (Matthew 16:19): “And whatsoever thou shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven.” Sometime later when speaking to all the apostles including Peter, Christ says (Matthew 18:18): “Amen I say to you whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose in upon earth, shall also be loosed in heaven.”

It is dogmatically certain that these texts mean that Christ promised to the apostles and their successors the power to forgive sins. A question at this point to Moon would be: Why do you suppose that Christ gave the apostles the power to forgive sins?

Continuing, and this is very important, Christ actually conferred the power to forgive sins on the evening of His Resurrection (John 20:21-23): “He [the Lord] said therefore to them: Peace be to you. As the Father has sent Me, I also send you. When He had said this, HE BREATHED ON THEM [emphasis mine]; and He said to them: RECEIVE YE THE HOLY GHOST [again, emphasis mine] Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” GOD BREATHED POWER WAS ACTUALLY GIVEN TO THE APOSTLES TO FORGIVE SINS.

Again, a question to Moon, which will probably never be answered, is why do you suppose that Christ gave the apostles the GOD BREATHED power to forgive sins?

Continuing, what is the one sin that will never be forgiven? THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST (Matthew 12:31), of course.

Now, a question to all who have participated on this thread. Can it be said that by denying the power of the Holy Ghost, GOD BREATHED to the apostles by Christ to forgive sins, be considered a sin against the Holy Ghost?

I fear you are right, and you will never get an answer here. MD cannot accept that God gave the Apostles any authority in this matter. To do so would cause his theology to unravel. You see, the ideas upon which his theology is based were founded upon a desire to rejec that authority. Calvin and his peers, during the Reformation, were reacting to the corruption of European clerics. They were trying to find some other source of authority with which to replace them, to purify the faith. They settled on the Scriptures. That bring us to the next reason you cannot get an answer, and that is that MD can never admit that the Church is also “God Breathed”. That would put the Church on equal footing with the Scripture in terms of nature and authority, and his deficient concept of Church cannot tolerate this.

To solve this problem, they have twisted the meanings of the words so that Jesus is just talking about preaching the gospel. That way, they can deny that He gave the Apostles any authority over and above what each believer has.

I forgot to mention, in response to MD wanting scriptural proof of where the disciples “lined up” for confession, that confession was paired with absolution through the priesthood in Lev. 5. The shadow in the OT is fulfilled in the NT.

I don’t imagine “lines” though. It seems that the early Church preferred “crowds”. We see the priestly model again with John’s baptism, where confession was paired with the washing of repentance:

Mark 1:4-5

4 John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 And there went out to him all the country of Judea, and all the people of Jerusalem; and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

One has to wonder, how did the listener know that sins were being confessed, if it was not done aloud?

And again we see a similar activity in Ephesus:

Acts 19:16-20
17 And this became known to all residents of Ephesus, both Jews and Greeks; and fear fell upon them all; and the name of the Lord Jesus was extolled. 18 Many also of those who were now believers came, confessing and divulging their practices. 19 And a number of those who practiced magic arts brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all; and they counted the value of them and found it came to fifty thousand pieces of silver. 20 So the word of the Lord grew and prevailed mightily.

How did anyone observing know that they were confessing and divulging their sins, if it was silent?

James 5: 16 Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed.

The believers found it most expedient to confess to those to whom Jesus had given the authority on earth to forgive their sins.

The other very important element that is often missed in James is that confession is healing, and confession to “one another” is God’s way of healing our shame of sins.

Don’t hold your breath, Tomster.

 

[Cat_Herder]

I fear you are right, and you will never get an answer here. MD cannot accept that God gave the Apostles any authority in this matter. To do so would cause his theology to unravel. You see, the ideas upon which his theology is based were founded upon a desire to rejec that authority. Calvin and his peers, during the Reformation, were reacting to the corruption of European clerics

By the time Calvin had obtained his influence, the Reformation had ceased to be about religion (if it ever was) and was entirely about politics. That is why Luther, Calvin and Zwingli were called magisterial reformers; they were supported by magistrates who wanted to use religion to gain civil authority. Said magistrates then went on to commit atrocious acts of war against Catholics and Catholic countries. Even the so-called radical reformers, who were not supported by the state, committed violence for political gain in the German Peasants’ War and the [English Civil War.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English Civil War)

Basically, the Reformation was all about war. Learned people can argue about whether or not the Reformers themselves were power-mongers or whether their own teachings were simply corrupted by politicians, but the result of the reforming was the worst war the world has ever seen.

If you want to discuss the politics of the Reformation further, this thread would be a better place to do it than here.

 

[ncgolf]

The other very important element that is often missed in James is that confession is healing, and confession to “one another” is God’s way of healing our shame of sins.

While these discussions are almost always on an intellectual level … for Catholics who practice regular confession the experential aspect cannot be denied. Not only do we know confession by Scripture we also can live today what the Apostles did and taught many years ago. It truly is a living Word.

This is part of why we cannot say "faith alone’ as described by the Reformers. We just dont know these things on an intellectual level but it is part of our everyday lives, to compartmentalize faith on its own, by itself just does not make one iota of sense.

 

[guanophore]

It is patently clear that the disagreement in such discussions does, as you imply, revolve around a misunderstanding of the word “saved”. The question, however, is which understanding is truly erroneous?

To some extent I think it is a misunderstanding that revolves around the word “saved”. It is a misunderstanding of the theological concepts of “saved”, and you are right, since the Reformers have a different definition for the term “salvation” than the Aposltes, it does create problems when we are discussing the concept.

You take the position that salvation is a “completed, divine act” at the moment …

This much is consistent with what the Apostles taught about Baptism.

one comes to faith in Christ and that there is nothing subsequent to this act which would prevent one from spending eternity with God at the completion of their earthly life. This latter reality is referred to as the “Kingdom of God” or “heaven”.

This part is the later innovation, redefining the Apostolic notion of salvation 1500 years after it was “once for all” committed to the Church.

But when one approaches Scripture - the NT in particular - in this manner, we find absolutely NOTHING that ever indicates that our inheritance in the kingdom of God is “by faith alone”.

I think if you can read the Scriptures with Reformed glasses on, you will be able to see it this way. If you are finding “nothing” to support the Reformed view in scripture, then you are probably only using the Apostolic lenses of Sacred Tradition. Set them aside for a moment, and take up the spectacles of Calvin and his progeny, and you will be able to see how, just like the earlier heretics did, Scripture can be used to support all manner of doctrinal innovations.

Here, for like the 20th time, I will share with you clear refutations to the concept that we “inherit the Kingdom of God” by faith alone. All of these verses are directed to “saved” believers who have been “sanctified” and “recieved the Spirit” but who were turning away from the truth:

Even though your efforts may not benefit MD, I think they are of great value to others reading the thread, some of whom may have fallen prey to such heresies. Thanks for all your effort.

 

[guanophore]

I never said Jesus "cannnot be physically present on earth."  I said He is PRESENTLY in heaven in His glorified, human body and therefore cannot be in millions of places on earth at the same time. A human body can only be in one place at one time.

Who are you to decide what Jesus can, and cannot do with His glorified human body? Has it not occurred to you that His glorified body is not bound to the space time continuum?

And to add to that, nor can His human body be dead (*sacrificially*, Catholicism teaches that its Eucharist is a true, propitiatory sacrifice)

I think you have been given misunderstanding about the Eucharist, Moon. While we are in agreement that Jesus glorified body is not “dead” (the reason the Roman charge against Christians as cannibals is groundless), the sacrifice of the Mass (eucharist) does not constitute each and every time a new propitiatory sacrifce. Rather, it is based upon the anamnesis of the Passover, in which the participants are brought present to the event we are commanded to do rememberance. There was only one deliverance from Egypt, and likewise, only one deliverance of humanity on Calvary. During Eucharist, we participate in His “once for all” sacrifice of Himself for our sins on the cross.

 But He didn't show Himself at the same time to various people in various places.  For that matter, can you show me in the Scriptures where Jesus, in His human body (whether in His body of humility or glorified body), was ever in more than one place at a time?  You can't, because a true human body cannot be *omnipresent*.  That's one (only one) of the big differences between humanity and Divinity.*Omnipresence* is a Divine attribute ONLY.

I think you are making your God too small, MD. He is not restricted by the space time continuum, nor must He abide by the physical laws of the universe as we do. If this were the case, then He would not be appearing in rooms with locked doors, rising into the heavens, walking on water, etc, etc. His human body can do anything His divine will desires that it do!

Nothing that is bound by the space time continuum can enter heaven, either, since heaven is outside of it. It is clear that you agree with the Catholic Teaching that Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father.

And still, Jesus is not now in His body of humility (which is needed for your Eucharist)

I am not sure what this means, but something is amiss here. This comment implies that a new sacrifice of a fleshly body takes place, which is an error.

All that is needed (elementally) for the Eucharist is the Bread and Wine that is to be blessed.

It’s you who are confused as to what is claimed to take place at your Mass. For Calvary to be “present” Jesus (body, soul, spirit and divinity) must be in His body of humility.

Perhaps you can explain what “body of humility” means here.

Think about the context, Moon. In order for the Passover to be "present’ with the Jews, they needed a slain Lamb. Our slain Lamb gave Himself “once for all”, and that is why He is made present in the Bread and Wine, and we no longer use a Lamb, as He did at His Last Supper.

And He must be bodily present in millions of places at the same time. Sorry, but you’ve just stepped out of the reality of humanity.IOW, the Holy Spirit supposedly makes it ACTUALLY present.

Well, don’t be sorry about it! One of the greatest blessings of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is that we step out of our humanity, and enter into eternity. It is the reason that eating the Body and Blood gives life to us.

Hence, Christ must "actually" exist in His body of humility and His glorified body at the same time; and His human body of humility must be *omnipresent*.  Which would make it no longer human but Divine.  Also, where is it taught in the Scriptures that such is the work of the Holy Spirit?

It is mind boggling, isn’t it? That is why it is called a mystery.

Do you think it would be possible to experience such a mystery WITHOUT the HS?

 

[guanophore]

His "*body of humility*" is the body in which he was born, suffered and died on the cross.  In contrast to His now glorified body in which He was raised.  It's the same body only now glorified, raised in power, never to experience death again.  Hence, what happened at Calvary can never be re-presented again:[indent]Rom 6:10 "*For the death that He died, He died to sin **once*** for all (time); but the life that He lives, He lives to God" (in a now glorified body).

I think you have failed to grasp the meaning of the Passover, Moon. Than you for defining “body of humilty”, though. I am curious what you believe the purpose of the Passover for the Jews was, if it was not to make them present again at their great deliverance from bondage by God?

Why do you suppose this feast was an enactment, a structured ritual that was so strictly followed?

And given what Scripture provides as answers to these questions, don’t you think there is a reason Jesus chose the Passover during which to institute His own anamnesis?

 

[guanophore]

Would you believe our position if we showed it?

I know what your position is.

Word to the wise, Gregg, the answer is no. Moon is unable to accept what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. He has been shown the errors of his notions for years here, on hundreds (?) of threads, and still must doggedly cling to his own erroneous ideas of what we believe.

I think it is necessary for him to block out our actual position, and replace it with his own invention of our position in order to maintain his separation from the Church founded by Christ. If he were actually to accept what the Church believes and teaches, he would have to become Catholic!

 

[moondweller]

Ephesians 5: 5-6
Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

Please note that the verse says “no fornicator”. It simply doesn’t matter who it is. If they are unrepentant they will not go to heaven.

Let’s take ANOTHER look at Eph. 5:5-6, leaving it in its own CONTEXT, rather than interpreting it within you works salvation context.

Paul is instructing the Ephesian believers who, according to Eph. 2:8-10, "have been saved by grace through faith…the GIFT of God, NOT AS A RESULT OF WORKS;" and who, having been saved through faith, are “created in Christ Jesus,” for good works (not BY those good works) that they should walk in them" (not be saved by them, see vss. 8-9 on how they were saved).Eph 5:3 But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and {there must be no} filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them; for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light."Paul is exhorting them to proper behavior according to who they ARE. He isn’t threatening them with loss of salvation. There are no threats of condemnation in this verse. The threats of condemnation come only from YOU, not Paul.

Paul states that no immorality or any impurity or greed should be even named among them, as is proper among SAINTS, along with any filthiness, silly talk or course jesting, which also is not fitting. Keep in mind, this is the first century and he’s writing to brand new Gentile believers who had ust come out of the darkness of paganism through faith alone in in Christ alone. We’re not talking 2000 years of the influence of Christianity and N.T. teaching.

He tells them that they already know with certainty that no immoral person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. And that it’s because of those things the wrath of God comes upon the “sons of disobedience.” But Paul is not calling them “sons of disobedience,” but rather the idolatrous, Gentile unbeliever, who, without Christ is “by nature” a child of wrath (see Eph. 2:1-3). Just as they were, prior to their faith in Christ.

Paul instructs those Ephesian SAINTS (holy ones, now in Christ and saved by grace through faith, not as a result of works, Eph. 2:8-9) that they are not to be “partakers with them.” Why? Because, he says, “you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light.”

There’s no threat of condemnation in Paul’s words to the Ephesian believers, Pax. It’s you who condemn, it’s you who cast off God’s redeemed, God’s SAINTS, into the eternal pits of Hell - not Paul. Instead Paul teaches:Rom 8:1 "Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."It’s not Paul who condemns those “who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling” (1 Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:1). It’s you.

They must have a "godly grief that produces a repentance that leads to salvation per 2 Cor 7:10

IN CONTEXT, Pax, Paul made those in the Corinthian church sorrowful by his previous letter of rebuke to them. He didn’t rejoice in that, but it did lead them to the point of godly “repentance” (Gr. metanoia) That is, they had a “change of mind” regarding the negative situation which had occurred within their fellowship. They were allowing an immoral act to persists. And that “repentance,” a corporate change of mind," regarding that situation was according to the will of God.

Paul explains in verse ten that there is a sorrow according to the will of God, and such a God-willed sorrow produces a repentance that is without regret and leads to salvation. Or, it could be translated: “leading to salvation without regret.” However, Paul wasn’t talking in the context of salvation here. But rather a godly sorrow which led them to right a wrong within their fellowship. In fact he states in verse eleven: “In everything you demonstrated yourselves to be innocent in the matter.” They addressed “the matter” and corrected it after being made sorrowful by the Spirit through his letter.

None of this is about salvation, say, as in Acts 2 where after Peter presented the gospel of Jesus Christ to that generation of Jews who crucified the Lord, and being “pierced to the heart” (the seat of belief, Rom. 10:9-10) and in grief asked, “Brethren (Jewish brethren) what shall we do?” Peter responded with “repent” (i.e., have a change of mind concerning Jesus whom they’d crucified). You see, Pax, in this case there was a godly sorrow (“pierced to the heart”) which resulted in a repentance leading to salvation. They BELIEVED in Christ. The requirement for salvation. That is not what was going on in Corinth.

Pax, in your unbelief, you continuously search the Scriptures to prove God wrong concerning salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone. But you must lift many verses out of context in order to maintain your preconceived notion. Which you demonstrate nicely.

 

[guanophore]

 What's being said there flies over your head.

Or under the feet, perhaps. And so may every such teaching that departs from the Apostolic faith.

Philthy has done an EXCELLENT job of pointing out exactly and precisely that St. Paul was addressing his instruction to BELIEVERS about living a holy life, without which, none of us shall see God.

However, a believer (according to the Scriptures) has no righteousness of his own (no man does). Like Abraham he’s reckoned (credited) righteousness; in fact, God’s righteousness,

"…that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which {comes} from God on the basis of faith,
​

This is one of the major departures of Reformed Theology from Apostolic faith. The Apostles taught that God wants to make us that which He has already declared us by grace through faith, to be (righteous). He wants us to embody the character of Christ, and to partake of His Divine Nature. He does not want to bring snow covered dunghills to heaven, but sons and daughters made in His likeness and image, demonstrating His character. Righteous because He is righteous.

A true believer is never identified as an idolater.

This is just silly, Moon. If believers could not fall into the sin of idolatry, then the OT would be a lot skinnier.

On the contrary, Scripture has no such phrase as “true believer”, a modern evangelical invention designed to support the butchering of Scripture. Believers can, do, and have fallen into the sin of idolatry, just like they fall into every other sin. If they don’t confess, and repent, they will die in their sins, and fail to be united with their heavenly inheritance.

The Scriptures recognize "*obedience*" as ***faith***:[indent]Rom 1:5 "*...through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about {the} **obedience of faith*** among all the Gentiles for His name's sake,"

Rom 16:26 "but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, {leading} to obedience of faith

Indeed, this is critical. The Aposltes taught that we are to obey the commandments of God by grace, through faith.

… But rather instructing those who “have been saved by grace through faith…the gift of God; not as a result of works” on what is proper conduct while in this world, to the glory of Christ.

I am glad we are in agreement that the proper conduct of a Christian is to be obedient to the commandments of God.

How is it that you think that a father should disown a son when he doesn’t behave properly (even perfectly).

Sometimes a father is compelled to do this. A father cannot leave a disobedient son in a position to misuse the inheritance.

Sometimes a son is disinherited because of his own choice. I commend you to the story of St. Francis, who returned to his father all his posessions, including the clothes on his back.

Tell me, is one born a son, or does one earn that position, that relationship?

John 1:12 "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, {even} to those who believe in His name
​

For us, believing means clinging to the vine, following His commandments, and walking in the ergos hagios that He has prepared beforehand for us. This is the fruit of the relationship.​

 

[Cat_Herder]

Paul is instructing the Ephesian believers who, according to Eph. 2:8-10, "have been saved by grace through faith…the GIFT of God, NOT AS A RESULT OF WORKS;" and who, having been saved through faith, are “created in Christ Jesus,” for good works (not BY those good works) that they should walk in them" (not be saved by them, see vss. 8-9 on how they were saved).Eph 5:3 But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and {there must be no} filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them; for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light."Paul is exhorting them to proper behavior according to who they ARE. He isn’t threatening them with loss of salvation. There are no threats of condemnation in this verse. The threats of condemnation come only from YOU, not Paul.

[BIBLEDRB]Romans 2:1-11[/BIBLEDRB]

And don’t tell me that Paul there is referring to the reprobate only. He says ALL MEN. As in, “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” If you are going to argue that all men doesn’t really mean all men then I’m going to introduce you to your Mother.