Faith alone or not?

[Calvin_95]

So Moondweller,
How does someone know that he really has saving faith that will ensure he goes to heaven? In your sotierology, how is that covenant relationship defined?

It gives evidence that one has not received the gift if one does not know the answer and MD knows exactly what I am talking about sice he has clearly received the eternal gift. Ask him.

 

[Calvin_95]

I notice you always dance delicately around this whenever you are confronted on whether or not it is required.

No, we don’t part on this point. In fact, I think we agree that a person who is saved will walk in the works that God has prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. If a person wants to live a life of sin, you would not consider such a person a “true believer”, using the modern invented term. In like manner, when we receive Christ’s teaching “ye shall know them by their works”, we believe that a ersons actions reflect the state of their soul. A bad tree cannot produce good fruit, right?

So really, it has a lot more to do with our PRESENT salvation than it does the future. A Catholic is saved when they are baptized, and sealed by the promised HS. Their faith is perfected by their works, and when they walk in His commandments, they are sanctified according to His grace working in them by the HS. It is this work of grace, by faith, through which we are saved.

I agree with you, though. If a person has to “work” their way to heaven, it does constitute a “works based salvation”.

What is curious is that you think the wage has changed when someone “comes to believe” in Christ. This is not consistent with the Apostolic Teaching.

You will get no arguement from Catholics on this point, either. God loves His children so much, He will let them walk away from Him if they so desire. It does not make them any less adopted.

The two are inseparabely connected, MD. A person who is “in Christ” does not live a life of sin. A person who chooses to live a life of sin does not have saving faith, or chooses not to exercise it. Unbelief bears the fruit of disobedience. The bad tree, bearing the bad fruit.

It is very Catholic of you to say this.

That may be, but Jesus told us that we are not in a position to judge the state of another person’s soul. His commandment not to pull up the tares from the wheat is one of the great puzzles of your presence here. You seem intent upon pulling up Catholics by their roots, against His explicit instructions.

Such a concept contradicts the witness of the Scriptures, and the Teaching of the Apostles. The nature of sin has not changed, just because Jesus has rescued us from slavery to it, MD. Sin is like leprosy, and Jesus was quite clear that sin is damaging to our relationships with one another, as well as to Himself.

No, MD, I don’t think we do. I embrace the Joint Declaration, which I don’t think even you could find any fault in, except that it was signed by Catholics.

Indeed as we should be. James writes that our works “perfect” or “complete” our faith, which is why we consider them to be inseparable from the faith that justifies us. Our faith needs to be completed and perfected. If it did not, Jesus would not have commanded it!

This is also why we never judge anyone’s “future” salvation, including our own. We cannot know if a person steeped in a life of sin may repent at the last minute, and place their faith in the saving blood of Christ.

Even a person who has believed, and fallen again into sin, may return to right relationship with God at any point. If that happens, God will put their sins as far as the East is from the West, and their reward will be the same as those who have “borne the heat of the day”.

I just want to comment about the term “true believer”. You have to use that term; particularly in America because so many people call themselves Christians and are not as evidenced by their lack of fruit and false gospel.

 

[Calvin_95]

A “Christian” can’t. How do you figure he’s speaking to “Christians” (believers). Oh, he was addressing religious men, for sure. But those religious men were “seeking to be justified by law” (i.e., works, Gal. 5:4) But that wasn’t the gospel Paul first delivered to them to be believed unto salvation, for justification, but a “different gospel.” He explains:
Gal 3:24 “Therefore the Law has become our tutor {to lead us} to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.”
Oh look, there it is again. FAITH ALONE. Nothing in back of it, just “by faith.”

To “fall from grace” means after having heard the gospel of God’s grace through Jesus Christ, to be believed, one instead seeks to be justified by the principle of law (works). Such a one has been “severed from Christ,” meaning Christ is of absolutely no benefit to him (Gal. 5:1-5). Those seeking to be justified by law (by the principle of works) never were believers. They never believed Paul’s gospel concerning God’s grace. Oh they heard it, but they didn’t BELIEVE it. They instead sought to be justified by the principle of law. Sound familiar?

.

I just love you brother MD; you have such a love for the Word of God, the Lord Jesus.

 

[Cat_Herder]

A “Christian” can’t. How do you figure he’s speaking to “Christians” (believers). Oh, he was addressing religious men, for sure. But those religious men were “seeking to be justified by law” (i.e., works, Gal. 5:4)

Why do you think that the only works that exist are the “works of the [Mosaic] law”? Gentiles are also judged according to their works.

[BIBLEDRB]Romans 2:6-11[/BIBLEDRB]

But that wasn’t the gospel Paul first delivered to them to be believed unto salvation, for justification, but a “different gospel.” He explains:Gal 3:24 "Therefore the Law has become our tutor {to lead us} to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith."Oh look, there it is again. FAITH ALONE. Nothing in back of it, just “by faith.”

“By faith” doesn’t mean “by faith alone” and James explained that quite well.

To “fall from grace” means after having heard the gospel of God’s grace through Jesus Christ, to be believed, one instead seeks to be justified by the principle of law (works). Such a one has been “severed from Christ,” meaning Christ is of absolutely no benefit to him (Gal. 5:1-5).

So it is possible to lose your salvation.

Those seeking to be justified by law (by the principle of works) never were believers. They never believed Paul’s gospel concerning God’s grace. Oh they heard it, but they didn’t BELIEVE it.

Paul says that the Galatians were saved, not reprobate.

[BIBLEDRB]Gal 1:3-5[/BIBLEDRB]

Yet he says they fell from grace. This is devastating for Calvinism.

 

[Cat_Herder]

The fact that you have to ask how someone knows is indication that you don’t have the testimony within you.

[BIBLEDRB]2 Peter 3:16[/BIBLEDRB]

That divine testimony is given only to those who have “believed” - according to the Scriptures.

[BIBLEDRB]1 Timothy 2:4[/BIBLEDRB]
[BIBLEDRB]1 Cor 10:11-12[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[guanophore]

A "Christian" can't.  How do you figure he's speaking to "Christians" (believers).

Well, let’s see. His letter is addressed TO THE CHURCH, which you yourself admit is the body of BELIEVERS. Also, a person can’t “fall from” that to which they are not holding, or attached. If I fall from a ladder, does that not rightly imply that I was standing on the ladder in the first place?

Oh, he was addressing religious men, for sure.

And how is a person connected to Christ without grace, or their own efforts? One cannot become a partaker of God’s grace unless one is “in Christ”, just like one cannot “fall from grace” unless they are first “in grace”.

To “fall from grace” means after having heard the gospel of God’s grace through Jesus Christ, to be believed, one instead seeks to be justified by the principle of law (works). Such a one has been “severed from Christ,” meaning Christ is of absolutely no benefit to him (Gal. 5:1-5). Those seeking to be justified by law (by the principle of works) never were believers. They never believed Paul’s gospel concerning God’s grace. Oh they heard it, but they didn’t BELIEVE it. They instead sought to be justified by the principle of law. Sound familiar?

It does sound familiar. It sounds like some works by Calvin I read.

We all know that one does not get in right relationship with God by just hearing the Gospel. And it is not possible to be connected to Christ apart from God’s grace. It is not possible to be “severed” from that to which one is not attached. It is a valiant spin, but it just butchers the text and the faith of the Apostles. The writer is addressing believers, and he is angry because they have “so quickly” fallen for that which was not authentic. They embraced the authentic Gospel from Paul himself, and his companions.

I had this discussion with another Reformed Christian, and was shocked to learn that they rendered “partakers of His grace” as those who were nearby - not really believers, but those that got blessings on account of those near them who believed. I am continually astonished at gymnastics necessary with the text to justify the Reformed theology.

 

[guanophore]

 It's a faith that rests in Christ's work alone.  It's a Christ centered faith.  And the testimony of God is within him

So basically a person knows they are going to heaven if they have done the proper ritual (believed with the heart and confessed with the mouth) and is convinced in themselves that they belong to Christ?

  The fact that you have to ask how someone knows is indication that you don't have the testimony within you.

No, MD, it does not. While I accept that this might be the case, as with those who asked Peter on Pentecost “what must we do?”, for those of us reading your posts, we see so much twisting of the Holy Scriptures through eisegesis and the infection of the heresies of Calvanism in your writing that one might be curious about this topic from a non-Apostolic point of view. You have to keep in mind that, from our point of view, you are presenting “a dfiferent gospel” than the one we received from the Aposltes. Yours was invented about 500 years ago, and some of us here have not been versed in it’s innovative doctrines.

Another reason this is not true is that Catholics, having received the faith of the Apostles as it was faithfully handed down, received as part of that once for all deposit of faith that we are not to judge even ourselves with respect to the state of our soul. We may not be aware of anything in ourselves that would prevent us for heaven, but it is for God to decide. This attitude accepts the human unconscious, the deep secrets of the heart that are not even known to the person himself. It is an attitude of humility that seems to be missing in the Reformed way of life.

 

[Cat_Herder]

That would be fine except one thing; you can’t use James as teaching that it is not by faith alone because James is teaching that true faith RESULTS, RESULTS, RESULTS in good works God prepared beforehand for the WHO? The Christian, which means one must already be saved to be a Christian in the first place.

God desires for all of us to be saved. So we are all born Christians. End of discussion.

Except that’s not true. There is a hell.

Notice that it says “all men.” No distinction between Christians/the “saved” and everyone else.

Again, it says “all men.” Again, no distinction between Christians/the “saved” and everyone else.

You are right and Jesus is wrong; you contradict the very words of the only Person who gives the grace to have faith.

You bear false witness.

[bibledrb]Gal 5:6[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]1 Cor 13:2[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]Jn 14:15[/bibledrb]

God alone is 100% pure salvation and 0% man and his activities.

Then why does the Christian’s faith or lack thereof matter at all? You keep saying “faith alone!,” but then you say we are born saved without having to do anything. It’s becoming quite obvious that you are just confused.

your Acts 2 baptism salvation contradicts almost every other portion of Scripture where people were what? Saved, then water baptized and if you put the Acts 2:38 in its easier to read Greek to English; you will see it agrees with the rest of Scripture.

Both belief and baptism are required.

[bibledrb]Mark 16:16[/bibledrb]

If the Catholic church was founded by Christ, then explain why the Catholic church so visible?

[bibledrb]Matthew 5:14[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]Mt 18:17[/bibledrb]

A city on a hill cannot be hidden; an invisible church cannot render judgment.

Another problem: Show one example where an Apostle or lets just say Peter ever forgave a single tiny sin by his authority; I’ll save you the time you won’t find what doesn’t exist. you will find plenty of example by Christs authority…LOL

[bibledrb]2 Cor 2:10[/bibledrb]

problem: Jesus said He was at the right hand of the Father to make intercession on behald of His children and the Father said ***SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL ***I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.

The Father is not subject to the space-time continuum either.

(a) The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross. It is now in the New Law, the sacrifice that is acceptable to God." Problem: Contradicts Hebrews 8 & 9 and the words of Jesus “IT IS FINISHED”.

Hebrews 10:16

Oh dear. If you commit a mortal sin, no more Calvary; you need someone to make Calvary present again for you.

Malachi 1:11

Thankfully, the perfect sacrifice, Calvary, is offered at every time and every place. Again, you are the one trying to make God small, saying that Calvary can’t be made present in the present age because Jesus is stuck in a fallen human body. That’s why you are so confused; you think that the words of men such as yourself can give salvation apart from any reference to the sacrifice of Christ or what Christ actually instituted for the salvation of men (i.e. the Sacraments.)

Now why would you want to put you eggs into a single basket; one that has nothing to do with the security of a believer; it is a contrast between law and grace as the entire Book of Galatians is.

You have grace and faith confused.

I just want to comment about the term “true believer”. You have to use that term; particularly in America because so many people call themselves Christians and are not as evidenced by their lack of fruit and false gospel.

[bibledrb]Matthew 7:1-5[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]Matthew 7:15-23[/bibledrb]

 

[Cat_Herder]

That would be fine except one thing; you can’t use James as teaching that it is not by faith alone because James is teaching that true faith RESULTS, RESULTS, RESULTS in good works God prepared beforehand for the WHO? The Christian, which means one must already be saved to be a Christian in the first place.

Really?

[bibledrb]1 Tim 2:3-4[/bibledrb]

God desires for all of us to be saved. So we are all born Christians. End of discussion.

Except that’s not true. There is a hell.

[bibledrb]Rev 20:12-15[/bibledrb]

Notice that it says “every one.” No distinction between Christians/the “saved” and everyone else.

[bibledrb]Rom 2:2-8[/bibledrb]

Again, it says “all men.” Again, no distinction between Christians/the “saved” and everyone else.

You are right and Jesus is wrong; you contradict the very words of the only Person who gives the grace to have faith.

You bear false witness.

[bibledrb]Gal 5:6[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]1 Cor 13:2[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]Jn 14:15[/bibledrb]

God alone is 100% pure salvation and 0% man and his activities.

Then why does the Christian’s faith or lack thereof matter at all? You keep saying “faith alone!,” but then you say we are born saved without having to do anything, including having faith. It’s becoming quite obvious that you are just confused.

your Acts 2 baptism salvation contradicts almost every other portion of Scripture where people were what? Saved, then water baptized and if you put the Acts 2:38 in its easier to read Greek to English; you will see it agrees with the rest of Scripture.

Both belief and baptism are required.

[bibledrb]Mark 16:16[/bibledrb]

If the Catholic church was founded by Christ, then explain why the Catholic church so visible?

[bibledrb]Matthew 5:14[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]Mt 18:17[/bibledrb]

A city on a hill cannot be hidden; an invisible church cannot render judgment.

Another problem: Show one example where an Apostle or lets just say Peter ever forgave a single tiny sin by his authority; I’ll save you the time you won’t find what doesn’t exist. you will find plenty of example by Christs authority…LOL

[bibledrb]2 Cor 2:10[/bibledrb]

problem: Jesus said He was at the right hand of the Father to make intercession on behald of His children and the Father said ***SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL ***I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.

The Father is not subject to the space-time continuum either.

(a) The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross. It is now in the New Law, the sacrifice that is acceptable to God." Problem: Contradicts Hebrews 8 & 9 and the words of Jesus “IT IS FINISHED”.

[BIBLEDRB]Hebrews 10:26-27[/BIBLEDRB]

Oh dear. If you commit a mortal sin, no more Calvary; you need someone to make Calvary present again for you.

[BIBLEDRB]Malachi 1:11[/BIBLEDRB]

Thankfully, the perfect sacrifice, Calvary, is offered at every time and every place. Again, you are the one trying to make God small, saying that Calvary can’t be made present in the present age because Jesus is stuck in a fallen human body. That’s why you are so confused; you think that the words of men such as yourself can give salvation apart from any reference to the sacrifice of Christ or what Christ actually instituted for the salvation of men (i.e. the Sacraments.)

Now why would you want to put you eggs into a single basket; one that has nothing to do with the security of a believer; it is a contrast between law and grace as the entire Book of Galatians is.

You have grace and faith confused.

I just want to comment about the term “true believer”. You have to use that term; particularly in America because so many people call themselves Christians and are not as evidenced by their lack of fruit and false gospel.

[bibledrb]Matthew 7:1-5[/bibledrb]
[bibledrb]Matthew 7:15-23[/bibledrb]

 

[ncgolf]

Problem: A Christian can’t do that by his new nature and by that new nature he desires the things God desires; like the salvation of all men. A Christian by nature is a SLAVE of Jesus and as a SLAVE he obeys his MASTER, even unto death if necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pax
Moon in Christ,

When you get a chance please give an answer to my questions.

Will a “true believer” that later engages in unrepentant fornication go to heaven?

The answer is yes. But you don’t need the word “unrepentant” in there. A “true believer” who engages in fornication WILL go to heaven upon death. Why does that surprise you? Do you deny that that sin of fornication was imputed to Christ on the cross and He died to it once for all?

The issue of salvation is not sin, but belief. Should a “true believer” engage in such an act. Of course not. Should a “true believer” grieve the Holy Spirit who indwells him by engaging in such an act? Of course not. It it proper behavior for a “true believer?” Of course not. It is the norm for a “true believer?” Of course not. You ask that question because you believe that it’s your behavior that will save you (future tense).

Moon seems to disagree. You say a “true believer” cannot do those things … Moon says yes they can. I agree with moon that a believer can engage in those activities the same as a non-believer. I also agree that any Christian (catholic or not) should not engage in these … but you don’t seem to think so … you think they cannot.

Which is it?

What you and Moon imply is that a true believing fornicator is substantially different from the unbelieving fornicator. There is one fornicator clothed in righteousness and one that is not but both are fornicators, hence my dung heap comment. Would you not agree that both are fornicators?

I ask again … who in that scenario is **required **to repent?

Ditto

I don’t infalliably know my eternal destiny, you do. I know I must work out my faith fear and trembling and that only by grace do I, with hope, begin to conform my will to God’s. God is a just and merciful judge.

Ouch, that was mean spirited; you weren’t speaking to me and that was a real stinger. Not very neighborly on that one. How many people deserve to be in heaven?

The number who deserve … we agree is small … probably 0 but that is not the question. See above for a clarification.

So if God choses to bring anyone, since noone deserves it; can He be unjust for allowing some and not others? No way!

Again that is not the question … I agree God can choose whom He wants, that is God’s purview not mine.

The question still is faith alone and the nature and effect of sin. You submit sinning is bad, we should’nt do it but by a moment of personal faith declaration the effect of any sin on me, past, present or future is removed. The only effect my sin has is on my brothers and sisters. What I do in the world still matters, really matters but in your theology … not really since personal salvation is guaranteed. It would be nice to live a Christian life but if you don’t so be it.

The effects of sin are real both to the body and soul whether they are commited by believers or not. I see the attractiveness of your theology, I really do, but it does not square with Scripture nor reason. A sinning, believing fornicator may repent to God and his family but is really not required to do so. Repenting changes nothing after a faith alone moment.

 

[guanophore]

Catholic teaching on Salvation in a nutshell; one must be righteous BEFORE one can be saved, because the error of blending justification into and with sanctification, contrary to what I posted by the very words of the ONLY one who can save anybody, GOD.

Ok Calvin, let’s see you back up your accusation here. Produce official Catholic documents that teach this. In this way, we will know it is really a Catholic teaching, and not just some calumny you are spreading here. Pleast start with the Joint Declaration on Justification, if you don’t mind.

God alone is 100% pure salvation and 0% man and his activities.

I can understand the Calvanisitic position of Total Depravity. I am curious how you understand the Scripture that injoins us to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling”.

That one verse alone puts a death grip on most religions under the umbrella of Christianity and is so often overlooked.

If you now as much about “most religions” as you know about the Catholic faith, then such as statement has very little value coming from such an uninformed source.

Hebrews 11 could be titled the “By Faith Alone” chapter.

I don’t see how. The whole chapter uses the grammatical construction 'by faith (name of person) + VERB". This chapter is more of a testimony to the Catholic conception of saving faith as a faith that WORKS.

But of course if it is not by faith alone, then what is it by?  No one seems to want to touch that one; i wonder why.

Catholics embrace the faith of the Apostles, so we never separate faith, hope, and love. For us, faith is never “alone” but is always accompanied by the deeds that befit repentance.

Here is the problem with all the works based salvation activities you mentioned above; none of it is in Scripture for the basis of salvation, but it is the result of salvation by faith alone in Jesus Christ alone.

This is the crux of your misunderstanding of Catholicism, Calvin. You are having to redefine what you read after running it through your Reformed filters.

You also don’t seem to realize that the NT is a CATHOLIC BOOK, written by, for, and about CATHOLICS. There is nothing in it that is not Catholic. Therefore, when the Catholic Paul writes to the Catholic Christians in Ephesus, saying “By grace you are saved through faith”, this is the foundation of Catholic belief about salvation.

So your rendering above of these being “works based” is simply erroneous. The works that we do are those that we believe God has prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

We just don’t separate Eph. 2:8-9 from v. 10 like you do. We believe that the grace that saves us is the same grace that produces the works. They are ergos hagios, grace based works.

your Acts 2 baptism salvation contradicts almost every other portion of Scripture where people were what? Saved, then water baptized and if you put the Acts 2:38 in its easier to read Greek to English; you will see it agrees with the rest of Scripture. Ironically, the Church of Christ folks make that same error because they use one verse and disregard the whole of Scripture, which proves the truth of Scripture as written in 1 Corinthians 2.

It only contradicts your perceptions of the Scripture, Calvin. Catholicism is not a “bible based religion”, so we don’t try to extract doctrine from handfuls of scripture.

 

[guanophore]

If the Catholic church was founded by Christ, then explain why the Catholic church so visible?

He intended to have a visible Church. This is what He meant when He said “take it to the Church”. He did not expect for the disciples to be floundering about looking for something invisible and mystical. He ordained and appointed authorities over His flock to govern them, and instructed the disciples to allow the authority He appointed to settle their disputes.

  Guess we might as well stop here.

It might be a good idea for you to stop here and consider your motives for coming to CAF. If you are not here to get “Catholic Answers” you may be in the wrong place. It is against the forum rules for you to proselytize here, so if that is your goal, your posting legacy will be short.

If you are really interested in Catholic Answers, you can find them here, but I can promise you that you will be found very annoying if you continue insisting on telling us what we believe, contrary to what we believe. No honest or productive dialogue can happen if you refuse to listen and accept that the other may be different than your preconceived notion of him.

No one will enter into heaven on any other basis and your error is in assuming the whole world is every single person rather than the actual context which is all people, tribes, tongues, great, small, young, old, black, white, brown etc; not every single person. What is the name of the group that teaches universal salvation? Can’t recall it so late.

I must confess that this is one of the most confusing statements I have ever read on here, and believe me, I have read a lot!
Calvin 95;7241238:

I’m sure he addressed it somewhere; perhaps you need to read ALL the posts to find it. But you assume Paul is speaking to a Christian and a Christian by defintion belongs to God, has died to self, has a new life in Christ, is indwelt by God Himself, cannot be snatched away, the old nature passed (means it is dead and has no ability to do anything-good bye old dead nature and hello new nature in Christ) away and behold new things. So the non-sense that God saves and can’t hold onto the Christian or that a Christian would care to turn back to the old night-mare life just shows what John said; they were not of us in the first place. (paraphrased and simplified for the readers understanding)

I agree, it is nonsense. However, being saved does not eliminate our free will, and though no one can snatch us out of HIs hand, we can sure jump out!

Then, what do you do with the Holy Spirit who dwells inyou which you did not put in Him there; so how doo you make Him leave; by walking away. He would just walk with you; you can’t remove Him just like you can’t put Him in there. See another problem that can’t be explained away.

One must think about salvation as a relationship. If I join my life to my spouse, I can hurt and injure her to the point where she no longer wishes to be in my company. This does not dissolve what God has joined together, but it makes it impossible for us to experience the harmony of marriage as God intended.

In like manner, it is possible to spurn the grace of God, and crucify again the Son, profaning the blood that bought us. It does not “undo” His purchase, we just can no longer benefit from it, because we have rejected Him.

 

[guanophore]

Problem: If that were the case and it is in the sense that God gave Peter and all the Apostles the gospel of “our” salvation, but not in the sense that the authority is with the person, but the MESSAGE CALLED THE GOSPEL OR GOOD NEWS. Mathew 18 confirms this as He spoke the same to His disciples or LEARNERS; the wider audience.

This is not a problem, because Catholics affirm this also. However, it was the goal of the Reformers to remove from themselves the authorities installed by the Church. In order to justify this rebellion against them, they had to come up with an innovative way of dispatching the scriptures that appear to support Apostolic Succession. This is one of them.

Another problem: Show one example where an Apostle or lets just say Peter ever forgave a single tiny sin by his authority; I’ll save you the time you won’t find what doesn’t exist. you will find plenty of example by Christs authority…LOL

Clearly you have been given a lot of misunderstandings about the Catholic faith. Are you willing to have them corrected?

The Apostolic Authority IS Christ’s authority. No apostle had any authority apart from Christ’s and their successors do not, either.

When Paul forgives “in the person of Christ”, it is not by his own authority! He also adds “I forgive them also”, making it clear that he speaks for Christ, and also for himself.

What did you think it meant when He said “He who hears you, hears me”?

More problems: The last statement: confessing to one another is to keep each accountable and to build and strengthen each other and to know what to pray for each other, not for putting away SHAME. That may be a byproduct, but the statement is another fallacy.

All of these things are true. Shame and guilt are natural byproducts of sin, from which we need healing. If you notice, the main reason that people don’t want to confess to another person is shame.

I now wonder if anyone, besides MD knows what the gospel of Jehovah is? That is a good title for a new thread. “What is the good news?”

Well, search it. It has been through here as long as CAF has been open.

Catholics do not settle for a truncated version as our Reformed brethren do, so for us, the Gospel message includes “all that Jesus began to do and to teach”.

 

[guanophore]

No no no no no, it is you who is making God small; He can’t save and hold onto people and can’t save w/out peoples help,

You seem to have so many misunderstandings about the Catholic faith. How did you come by them? Do they teach you this in Sunday School?

God can save whoever He wants, however He wants. He has made us very great and precious promises that no one will snatch us out of His hand. Do you not believe this? What makes you think Catholics don’t?

God chooses to work through humans to bring about salvation. He doesn’t “have to”, He wanted to. When Paul says “I become all things to all men that by all means I might save some”, he certainly does not mean that he saves them. He is aware that, when he makes himself available to God, God can work through him to bring about salvation in others.

and the miracles you present were for a specific purpose here on earth at the right time. He is now at the right hand of the Father; unless of course you don’t believe Jesus or the Father, which by your words you do not appear to, but maybe I’m wrong…hope I am.

Yes, you are wrong. I just don’t place those kinds of limits on the King of the Universe. Since appearing here on earth is a manifestation in the space time continuum, and He exists outside and beyond it, I do not believe He is bound by the physical laws of the universe.

 Problem: Double speaking 10 point foul.

You are calling a foul on me because I affirmed that you have accepted a Catholic teaching?!?!?!

"I  love this; "

(a) The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross. It is now in the New Law, the sacrifice that is acceptable to God." Problem: Contradicts Hebrews 8 & 9 and the words of Jesus “IT IS FINISHED”.
Source:

Good! Then you can admit that there is not a “new sacrifice” every time we have Mass. Instead, we participate in the once for all sacrifice of Christ on Calvary.

Jesus sacrifice is finished. What we “add” to it is ourselves. Our work is not finished.

 Don't know, but if the sacrafice was when He was in His Body of Humility", then why would you try to put Him back there; seems kind of mean to me? glad He is in the drivers seat; I'm sitting in the back; where are you sitting?

Indeed it is a painful anamnesis at times, especially when I am keenly aware of my own sins that drove the nails into His flesh. I don’t think it is possible to understand the Eucharistic celebration apart from the Passover.

If you really believe it was “mean” for the Israelites to sacrifice a lamb and eat it at Passover in rememberance, then I don’t think you understand the meaning of the ceremony.

Read your own words “ONCE FOR ALL” ONCE: “On one occasion”, “in one case”, “at a previous time”…hummm hummm thinking thinking hummmm

There are some aspects of salvation that are passed (once for all). There are some that are still being “worked out” and there are some that do not come in this life. This is the Apostolic concept of salvation, past, present, and future. Calvin decided to truncate it, and separate sanctification and glorification from justification. It served his purpose in being able to found a new church according to his own standards.

I thought you had life because the Father breathed life into His creation and I thought He gives eternal life to whom He choses threw HIs Son by the propitiation of His righteousness to those who believe on the basis of FAITH ALONE. Is it by CHRIST ALONE?

Yes. And that Christ commanded us “unless you eat my Body, and drink my Blood, you have no life within you”, and we obey Him.

Problem: A Christian can’t do that by his new nature and by that new nature he desires the things God desires; like the salvation of all men. A Christian by nature is a SLAVE of Jesus and as a SLAVE he obeys his MASTER, even unto death if necessary. Did God not prepare works before the foundation of the world that the Christian would walk in them? Well yes of course He did; He said and therfore it is true.

Yes, this is what we believe. This is why, when you call our obedience in them “works based” we get confused. For us, we are only doing that which is our duty.

Ouch, that was mean spirited; you weren’t speaking to me and that was a real stinger. Not very neighborly on that one. How many people deserve to be in heaven? So if God choses to bring anyone, since noone deserves it; can He be unjust for allowing some and not others? No way!

In that case, how is it hurtful? Don’t you REJOICE that you are a snow covered dungheap?

So to answer your question. A Christian cannot “fall from grace” in the context of Salvation. By the Christians new nature that is impossible.

Maybe you can explain to us how it is possible for a person to fall from that upon which they were never resting?

 

[guanophore]

It gives evidence that one has not received the gift if one does not know the answer and MD knows exactly what I am talking about sice he has clearly received the eternal gift. Ask him.

Oh, we have asked him, no doubt.

It sounds exactly like what the Mormons tell me about knowing that the BOM is inspired Scripture. I should feel a “burning in the bosom” perhaps?

 

[Philthy]

Referred to is your rebuttle? Guess we might as well stop here.

You asked a hypothetical question to prove an irrelevant point. I answered your hypothetical question but do not wish to discuss the irrelevant point it leads to.

So paradise has now been removed from the Kingdom; hope the poor repentant thief is aware of this new development.

No calvin, Jesus did not say you “ARE WITH ME” in paradise, he said “you WILL BE WITH ME” in paradise. There is a difference and, quite frankly, it is also irrlevant.

No one will enter into heaven on any other basis and your error is in assuming the whole world is every single person rather than the actual context which is all people, tribes, tongues, great, small, young, old, black, white, brown etc; not every single person.

Oh really? How exactly do you know that? Is that the same context that Romans 6:3 is in, where Paul says “ALL” have sinned? Perhaps that means that not EVERYBODY has sinned but simply “people, tribes, tongues, great, small, young, old, black, white, brown etc; (but)not every single person.” In fact, that might explain why the men I listed are revealed by Scripture to be “righteous” even though you claim that’s impossible.

No; don’t have that much time to waste; do you?

No, I don’t have time to waste. Do you?

So if it is not by faith alone, then what is it faith and works?
If by works then what happens to grace? See your problem?

I dont have any problem. You seem to have a problem stating what you are thinking.
What does Scripture say about inheriting the KOG? Does it say that it is by faith alone anywhere?? If it does, please point it out. I have shared a number of verses that point to a condition of inheriting the KOG - none of them speak of faith alone.

I’m sure he addressed it somewhere; perhaps you need to read ALL the posts to find it.

This is a very good example of your inability to articulate clearly so that what you intend to say can be understood. Either you are “sure” that he addressed and then that reality would obviate your stating that “perhaps” I need to read all the posts. If you were sure, then you could state definitively that IF I were to read all the posts I would find it. But you havent actually read them all, and when you say you are “sure” you actually arent sure - you simply wish it were so. I wonder how much your definciency in articulating clearly your own thoughts reveals your inability to understand what is meant by the opinions of, say, Paul in Scripture.

But you assume Paul is speaking to a Christian

I assume Paul is talking to a Christian in Galatians??? The letter is addressed to the church in Galatia - of course he is speaking to Christians. Here is just a sampling of the things he says of the people he is writing to which confirms that they are Christians:
“I want to learn only this from you: did you receive the Spirit from works of the law, or from faith in what you heard?”
Who “receives the Spirit” Calvin? Non-Christians? Christians do, and Paul says they have recieved the Spirit. The are Christians.
“For through faith you are all children of God 17 in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.”
Hmmm, they are all children of God through faith in Christ…what should we call them do you suppose? Pagans? They are Christians, of course.
The problem is not in identifying them as Christians, the problem is that you import Calvins heresies regarding salvation and inheriting the KOG into the verses when they don’t exist. You start with "salvation is by faith alone, blah blah blah, and then you rationalize away the clear meaning of what is said. Here, take a look for yourself…

and a Christian by defintion belongs to God, has died to self, has a new life in Christ, is indwelt by God Himself, cannot be snatched away, the old nature passed (means it is dead and has no ability to do anything-good bye old dead nature and hello new nature in Christ) away and behold new things.

So you conclude that he “wasnt taking to Christians because he wouldnt say such things to Christians because the things he says contradict salvation by faith alone” What SHOULD be going through your mind is: If he says these very clear things to Christians, then something is wrong with some of the theology of Calvin because Paul clearly contradicts what Calvin taught. It’s sad, really.

Then, what do you do with the Holy Spirit who dwells inyou which you did not put in Him there; so how doo you make Him leave; by walking away. He would just walk with you; you can’t remove Him just like you can’t put Him in there. See another problem that can’t be explained away.

I’ll tell you what - you can reply to my post 644 if your man enough - I don’t need to go off on speculative side tracks regarding the Holy Spirit dwelling in me. The question is whether a Christian can “fall from grace and be separated from Christ” Read Galatians, read my post 644 and tell me where Im wrong.

Blessings!

 

[guanophore]

So you conclude that he “wasnt taking to Christians because he wouldnt say such things to Christians because the things he says contradict salvation by faith alone” What SHOULD be going through your mind is: If he says these very clear things to Christians, then something is wrong with some of the theology of Calvin because Paul clearly contradicts what Calvin taught. It’s sad, really.

It has been a delight to read your posts, Philthy. This is so true, and hopefully, Calvin is not so cemented in the heresies he has inherited that he is unwilling to take a look at the fact that what was passed down to him was already a departure from the Apostolic faith.

 

[Philthy]

I have to say MD, you are a warrior! I am up for the battle however, and your spin won’t save you in this one (pun intended!)…

A “Christian” can’t. How do you figure he’s speaking to “Christians” (believers).

Lets see…ummm they were members of the churches at Corinth(1:2), they had the gospel preached to them by none other than Paul(1:8), they had received the Spirit (2:2) they were children of God through faith in Christ(3:26) and they had clothed themselves in Christ through baptism(3:27) and, they knew God (4:8&9) which is Scriptures definition of eternal life. Very impressive resume, really. They are Christians in every sense of the word…except one - yours. So on what basis, exactly, do you claim they are NOT christians? It is predicated on your PRECONCEIVED NOTION that a Christian cannot “fall from grace” and cannot be “separated from Christ”. I remain entirely unimpressed by your pleadings. Lets see what you have come up with.

Oh, he was addressing religious men, for sure. But those religious men were “seeking to be justified by law” (i.e., works, Gal. 5:4) But that wasn’t the gospel Paul first delivered to them to be believed unto salvation, for justification, but a “different gospel.”

They had received Pauls gospel by faith and they believed it, MD. And they believed it unto salvation, for justification and they “received the spirit” - all prior to this event. You are distorting what is being said. You are attempting to claim they never heard and accepted Paul’s gospel - that is baloney. Paul is very clear about that. They are “turning away” from the gospel the RECEIVED. They are FALLING AWAY - and that doesnt fit Reformed theology and that is the only reason you are creating these weak diversions.

He explains:Gal 3:24 "Therefore the Law has become our tutor {to lead us} to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith."Oh look, there it is again. FAITH ALONE. Nothing in back of it, just “by faith.”

umm, no, there is no faith ALONE there…there is justification through faith. And that justification continues through faith…unless you fall away from faith and then that justification is jeopardized. That’s the whole point of the letter silly.

To “fall from grace” means after having heard the gospel of God’s grace through Jesus Christ, to be believed, one instead seeks to be justified by the principle of law (works).

Sorry, this is completely bogus. That is not at all what falling from grace is, what you are describing is REJECTING grace. They had already accepted the true gospel and had experienced all the telltale signs of being genuine Christians (as listed in my first paragraph) and now they were turning away, falling from the gospel of Christ and the grace of God.

Such a one has been “severed from Christ,” meaning Christ is of absolutely no benefit to him (Gal. 5:1-5).

This is also untenable. being “severed from” means they were once attached. You cant make this work, MD. It’s time to give it up.

Those seeking to be justified by law (by the principle of works) never were believers.

You need to believe this, and you justify your position by claiming it, but there is nothing - absolutely nothing - that is contained in the letter to lead you to this conclusion. Instead, you import your theology into the letter and rationalize that this must be the case. Many of Pauls comments directly and indirectly refute your claim that they were “never believers”.

They never believed Paul’s gospel concerning God’s grace.

Show me where it says this in this letter MD. You are making it up because without doing so your theology falls apart.

Oh they heard it, but they didn’t BELIEVE it. They instead sought to be justified by the principle of law. Sound familiar?

No it doesnt. What sounds familiar is your spin on Scripture to fit your theology. You have not a shred of evidence that they did not beleive and accept the gospel preached to them the first time by Paul. Furthermore, as I pointed out there is every reason to believe that they did recieve it, believe it, receive the spirit, get baptized into christ, became children of God, etc etc. Nowhere, not even once is ever hinted at that they “never” believed.

 

[Pax]

This was well said, but I would add that there even though men can’t earn their way to heaven, their cooperation with God’s grace in their lives does have merit, just as their choice to not cooperate with God’s grace (which is to say, they sin) leads to condemnation. While we can not work our way to heaven, we should also recognize that we do have some responsibility in our own salvation. A better way to put it is that we must love our way to heaven, following Jesus’ words and example. And remember, Love is doing something without expecting anything in return. Works must be in this vein to be spiritually rewarding. We must do them out of love, not to earn a reward. And this is what Moondweller can’t quite understand. We do works because we are compelled to do them out of lvoe or God and neighbor. And if we fail to do them, and instead sin, we will be condemned. If he truly has saving Faith as he claims, Moondweller too will be compelled to do the works of God, because that is the output of such faith. Faith without works as we all know, is DEAD. and if you have faith enough to move mountains but do not have love, you are nothing. Therefore, while we must thank God for the grace to do his works, we can not blame God if we fail to do them and are condemned for that choice.

At its very essence, Reformed theology eshews all personal responsibility for salvation. It is all in God’s hands, with nothing for man to do but play out the role set out or him - a living puppet as it were. To me, this undersells both God and man because it makes man nothing more than an automaton (and a corrupt one at that) and makes God unjust and unloving because some men are condemned through no fault of their own.

Catholic theology has a much more elevated view of both God and Man. In our theology, man has been given real free will - he can chose between good and evil and will reap the benefits or pay the price as he deserves. While beholden to God for everything he has, he does bear real responsibility for his own salvation and can help in the salvation of others. And God is Just, judging men on their own merits; loving and merciful, always reaching out to man and allowing him infinite chances to repent; and all powerful, able to complete his plan for us all while still allowing men free will.

Paul C,

I never meant to suggest that, as human beings created in the image and likeness of God, that we are somehow “inert.” That is certainly a failure within much of Calvinist thought. Prior to God’s grace and outside of faith we are completely unable to do anything to please God. Moreover, we cannot save ourselves and we cannot lift ourselves out of sin. We are sort of like a person locked inside a car without gasoline. The car cannot be started and we have no way of procuring or putting fuel in the tank. We and the car are stuck.

Without God’s grace we are stuck in our sins and will die in them. Grace is the great enabler and it is for this reason that the credit goes to God. It is by the merits of Jesus Christ gained by his passion, death, and resurrection that we can receive forgiveness, justification, redemption, and salvation.

Your points are well taken…we are not inert for we are created in the image and likeness of God, and then we are even made a new creation in Christ Jesus for good works. We freely accept God’s gifts by way of his empowering grace. Likewise, our free will is left intact after our justification and, we can as Phil points out from scripture, “fall from grace.”

Thanks, and God bless.

 

[Pax]

That would be fine except one thing; you can’t use James as teaching that it is not by faith alone because James is teaching that true faith RESULTS, RESULTS, RESULTS in good works God prepared beforehand for the WHO? The Christian, which means one must already be saved to be a Christian in the first place. By WHAT? Gace! Through what? Faith! In Whom? JESUS CHRIST! Why? His glory alone.

So one could debate your ideaology all day long and it would not change what Scripture teaches. I used Jesus very words to prove the point; do you not believe what the Savior has said?

Catholic teaching on Salvation in a nutshell; one must be righteous BEFORE one can be saved, because the error of blending justification into and with sanctification, contrary to what I posted by the very words of the ONLY one who can save anybody, GOD.