R
Richard_Feynman
Guest
Are you saying that according to this one verse, you can determine if you are saved or not? You don’t have to read the rest of the bible to understand the underlying message of this verse?
- Status
M
mikekle
Guest
Well, that is basically what it says. I didnt say anything about not having to read the rest of the bible, but I think this verse speaks for itself.
Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.
Plus, this is not the only verse in which it states all one has to do to be saved is simply believe God is who he claims to be. I can find more verses that say this same thing,but in different words.
P
Paul_Edwards
Guest
It does not say “this is all” or “alone”. Even Adolf Hitler believed
D
dronald
Guest
But it’s still a promise that the rest of the Bible does not contradict.
For example, I too confess with my mouth and believe in my heart that Jesus is Lord and God raised Him from the dead; therefore I shall be saved.
For me to continuously do this and believe this and yet not eventually be saved would invalidate this promise.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
St. Augustine (d. 430) warns the faithful: “Let us not listen to those who deny that the Church of God has power to forgive all sins” (De agon. Christ., iii).
St. Ambrose (d. 397) rebukes the Novatianists who “professed to show reverence for the Lord by reserving to Him alone the power of forgiving sins. Greater wrong could not be done than what they do in seeking to rescind His commands and fling back the office He bestowed. . . . The Church obeys Him in both respects, by binding sin and by loosing it; for the Lord willed that for both the power should be equal” (On Penance I.2.6).
newadvent.org/cathen/11618c.htm
And the faithful obey in “both” respects. Aside from historic, its just good sense imho.
R
Richard_Feynman
Guest
Actually…
“Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 7:21 DRA)
D
dronald
Guest
Ah, indeed. Those who do not do the will of God shall not enter.
15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
17 So , every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit.
18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.
19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord, ’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name? ’
23 And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness. ’
24 "Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock.
I hope I am bearing good fruit and not bad. I know that I have Faith in my God, I love Him and am doing my best for Him.
Q
QNDNNDQDCE
Guest
I think it is a mistaken hermeneutic to look at the the Greek text and say that a particular Greek word means something much more in a particular verse than it does elsewhere. It is a fact that the Greek word here means “all,” not “past, present and future.” For example, Matthew 3:5 states, Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, using the same Greek word as Colossians 2:13. Does this mean that all Judaea and Jordan “past, present and future” went out to him. The answer is, no of course; it only means present. The meaning of such a word is dictated by context.
Secondly there are many places in the New Testament which say that past sins have been forgiven or that forgiveness of sins after initial justification is contingent on other things. For example,
But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. (2 Peter 1:9)
Secondly there are many places in the New Testament which say that past sins have been forgiven or that forgiveness of sins after initial justification is contingent on other things. For example,
But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. (2 Peter 1:9)
Q
QNDNNDQDCE
Guest
But surely you see a discrepancy here. Our Lord and his Holy Apostles state many things which will exclude us from the Kingdom of Heaven. To name one example among so many, a few of which given in this thread already, For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. I think there are two chief points to observe.
(1) God forgiving us our trespasses is absolutely necessary for our salvation.
(2) God will not forgive us our trespasses if we do not forgive others.
However, I think anyone must admit that forgiving others is not identical with “confessing with thy mouth the Lord Jesus” and “believing in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead.” Therefore, there are only two logical conclusions. The first is that Paul’s exhortation in Romans 10 does not envision a bare and excessively literalistic reading that all that is necessary is to say that Jesus is Lord and believe in the Resurrection. After all, nearly all Protestants would say that one has to believe and confess more than Jesus’s lordship and His Resurrection to be saved (e.g. man’s need to be redeemed from sin). The other is the ridiculous ad hoc interpretation that whenever Christ or the Apostles mention something that could exclude us from eternal life, he is not speaking to Christians. This is worthy of ridicule because the New Testament was written for Christians, not Jews and pagans, and these passages are never explicitly marked off as such, so we would have to assume that the New Testament spends most of its length teaching something other than the Gospel and when it does, it usually teaches it only obscurely.
P
Paul_Edwards
Guest
It would not it would mean you misunderstood the promise. A boss might say: if you clean my car I’ll give you higher promotion, but if you don’t get it still because you started deliberately missing work no-one would say it invalidates the promise.
Promises have obvious conditions which need not be pacifically mentioned
M
mikekle
Guest
Well, then that is a major contradiction to the verse I quoted.
G
grannymh
Guest
May I gently suggest that there are other ways, besides Sacred Scripture quotes, to deal with the issue of “Future sins forgiven?”
The Catholic Church tells us that the human person, upon birth, is left in the hand of her or his own counsel so that she or he can freely seek our Creator and attain joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision. This happens because humankind is rational with freedom of will. Thus, forgiveness or non-forgiveness cannot happen until a specific sin-filled act is chosen and freely committed.
The Catholic Church tells us that the human person, upon birth, is left in the hand of her or his own counsel so that she or he can freely seek our Creator and attain joy eternal in the presence of the Beatific Vision. This happens because humankind is rational with freedom of will. Thus, forgiveness or non-forgiveness cannot happen until a specific sin-filled act is chosen and freely committed.
- Status