How do Catholics answer to John 3: 16?

[mikeledes]

The Catholic position is that you MUST do “good” works to enter into heaven. But Jesus said Himself that not all those who have done good works and called Jesus “Lord” will enter into the kingdom of heaven, but only those who have done the will of His Father in heaven. (Matt. 7:21) True, good and saving works are ONLY produced by good and saving faith. Jesus knows the difference. Do you?

EVERYTHING that man does is a “work.” Each “work” is produced either by faith in God, or by faith in Man. Jesus said, “Not everyone who says unto me “Lord, Lord” shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.” That “confession” will not get you into heaven.

Yet this must be reconciled with Romans 10:9, 10 which says, in part, that “If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus…”

The reconciliation is found in the fact that the confession must be genuine. People can give FALSE confessions, and they can give FALSE works. False works are the product of a FALSE confession. “A good tree CANNOT put forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree put forth good fruit.” (Matt. 7:18)

The Catholic position is that you must do good works out of faith and love and you must be in a state of grace (i.e. justified). We do not believe in a mere external observance of God’s commandments. So obviously if your good works are done out of hypocrisy, then they will not be pleasing to God. If anyone claims that Catholicism teaches that all that matters is good works, regardless of disposition, then they do not understand the Catholic position.

Moreover, if confession is a work, then Paul is very clear:

Romans 10:9

9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

He says believe AND confess and you will be saved, not believe alone and you will be saved. You may say that this confession is a work and yet Paul conditions salvation on faith and this work done in faith, not faith alone.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Provigil]

I am wondering what the Catholic response is when Protestants site John 3:16(“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.”) in support of their “saved by faith alone” belief.

 

[Provigil]

FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD THAT HE “GAVE”

–GAVE: as a gift in the incarnation, and also “over to death” in the crucifixion.

PROVIGIL

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[mikeledes]

The problem in your interpretation of Peter is that you think that “forgotten” means that someone really forgot that he “got saved.” But actually, in this context, it means that you never had any original event of salvation to remember. Someone who has “forgotten” is the same as someone who has NOTHING TO REMEMBER, and that’s what that means.

Notice what Peter says: "For if these things “these things” are things that are ADDED to faith] are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. . . "

Your assumption is that there is such a thing as DEAD faith. But as we have seen in the rest of the Bible, specifically Jesus’ teachings, there is no such thing as a person who inherits the kingdom of God without any works produced by saving faith.

Can you cite a single example where “forgotten” is used in this way in the Bible, the Greek, or English language? You are bending the rules of grammar and semantics to suit your view. Let’s read what Peter said:

2 Peter 1:9

**9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.
**

It says HE WAS (past tense) CLEANSED FROM HIS SINS. There is an original event to remember and this person had failed to remember this. If you have “nothing to remember”, then BY DEFINITION, you have not forgotten anything. If I never knew name, then according to standard use of the word, I could not have “forgotten” it.

Moreover, the Catholic position is that a dead faith CANNOT save. The faith that saves is the faith that works through love and thus produces good works.

God bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

True, this is getting way off topic, but the point is that the Catholic Church has many teachings which are not correct. You’ll notice that una fides is happy to simply state that this is not an “official” teaching of the Church. And even what you have stated COULD be wrongly interpreted to mean that Paul was talking to a bunch of people who worshiped the same God and would end up in heaven just like us because they worship the same God.

You have to be extremely careful to not only make mention that they “worship the same God” but that Paul was trying to teach them what they lacked - a proper understanding of who that God is, so that they could come to the knowledge of saving faith.

And I believe that the Baptist church - or churches, since there are several - also has a number of teachings that are incorrect. The pagan Greeks did not have a proper understanding of God and they worshiped Him without having a proper understanding of who He was. This does not mean that they were saved. So to say that Muslims worship God does not necessarily mean that they are automatically saved or that the Muslim religion is a way of getting saved.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

I reaffirm what I said earlier:

Many Protestants misunderstand what we mean when we say that we are not saved by faith alone. We uphold that a faith that is by itself cannot save (James 2:15-17) and that’s why we affirm that the faith that saves is formed faith (fides formata), that is, a faith that is united to and animated by the love of God. And since love is as necessary for salvation as faith, we do not believe that we are saved by faith alone.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=337641

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=339712

God Bless,
Michael

 

[Garland]

Well I guess Ill answer you one more time. You seem to be very fond of luther and his teachings so why not follow all of them. He taught that we were like a pile of cow dung, and when we were baptized it was like a new snow covering us and making us white. Under the snow we werent changed just covered, we remain the same pile of dung. He also taught that we should sin boldly for if we didnt then Christ died for nothing so do what ever you wish, you cant lose. He taught that if your wife had a headache then let the maid come, for there was no shame in sex with whomever since faith saved you. I think you should read more on this alcoholics life before you cling to him so strongly. He added the word alone to the scripture about being saved by faith. He claimed the book of James was an epistile of straw not worthy of use by any christian. I am part of the solution, and pray you will be also. I was like you a prodical son until I became tired of eating the husk with the hogs, and came home to the Church that HE founded and the gates of hell will not prevail against it, or a lot of other gates as well. I know you dont understand what that church is for if you truly did you like me, would be part of it. I was where you are and I have decided that you can think bad things about me and HIS church, but the one thing you cant do is stop me and this Church from loving you and praying for you understanding of what you seem to hate. To dispairage his church is to do the same to Him and to the one who sent Him. God love and keep you and may you be one in him soon. Garland

 

[SacredHeart1987]

I am wondering what the Catholic response is when Protestants site John 3:16(“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.”) in support of their “saved by faith alone” belief.

Protestants never read John 3:16 in context. Just a few verses later in verse 21 Jesus says “But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.” Here Jesus does not emphasize those who believe but “whoever lives by the truth.” Jesus implies that they come into the light of faith precisely because they have been living in the truth. Jesus is not divorcing faith from works. He is identifying one with the other. Moreover. these are not boastful , self-righteous works done under the system of obligation, but works that have “been done through God.” Once again, we see the unfortunate tendency of Protestants to interpret Scripture’s use of faith to be faith alone which only appears in James 2:24 where it is denounced. Scripture never uses such terminology; rather, it invariably couples faith with the works in the realm of grace for the purposes of justification.

 

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS:

I think I may just have to ignore you, because you don’t say ANYTHING. You post a bunch of Scriptures without comment, and then expect that they actually support your BELIEFS? Thanks for playing,here are some parting gifts…

It is your choice to remain silent, I respect that.

Oh, I never said I was remaining silent. I simply said that I refuse to engage someone who was refusing to engage on a level of logic that actually was interested in defending their beliefs with REASON, and not arbitrarily shooting from the hip with a shotgun approach.

jcrichton:

But please do not curb my right to protest your protestation!

1. 
   *]I have no ability, nor authority to “curb your right to protest.”
   *]If that was a protest, I’d hate to see you rest your case!

 

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS:

You don’t read for comprehension, do you?

Perhaps you could clarify since demons belive that there’s One God, yet their faith is empty as they do not submit to His Authority!

Yet, you claim that all that there is to Salvation is Faith–then you embelish by making definitions of faith vs faith!

As I said, you’re not reading for comprehension. I never said anything of the sort. It’s impossible to debate you, because you make caricatures of what I’ve stated instead of actually quoting me as having said any such thing. You do know how to quote, don’t you?

 

[PEPCIS]

[snipped out comments that were not only off-topic, but wrong on many counts]

[Christians] do not have to have a certain amount of good works to be saved. [But] You do need to be in a state of grace, which also does not mean that you are necessarily out doing good works. You could have just sacramentally confessed your sins and died and you will go to heaven because you are in a state of grace.

Confessing sins, in the tradition of the Catholic Church, is a work. It is a REQUIREMENT of those who wish to remain in grace (to go to heaven) to confess regularly. The seven sacraments of the Catholic Church are all about WORK, and have nothing to do with grace. Grace can only be received, and never earned.

 

[PEPCIS]

I have a couple questions for you, PEPCIS: From where did you get your interpretation of Scripture?

Holy Spirit.
una fides:

Where did you learn to interpret Scripture in the manner that you do?

School and Holy Spirit.
una fides:

What oral teachings influenced your interpretation of Scripture?

Those contained within the canon of Scripture. All others are anathema.
una fides:

What church do you go to. . . ?

Baptist.
una fides:

. . . and what do they teach you every Sunday?

Bible.
una fides:

And how can you be certain that you have the correct interpretation of the verses we are discussing?

You haven’t shown that I don’t. Give me your opinion, properly juxtaposed with my statements and the Scriptures under consideration.

 

[geezerbob]

Could someone explain to me and maybe give me a few verses on how works are necessary for salvation?

Read Mt.25: 31-46. It’s right there, straight out of the mouth of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and in plain language that is hard to misunderstand or put a spin on (although some people jump through hoops to try to make it mean something else).

 

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS to mikeledes:

The Catholic position is that you MUST do “good” works to enter into heaven. But Jesus said Himself that not all those who have done good works and called Jesus “Lord” will enter into the kingdom of heaven, but only those who have done the will of His Father in heaven. (Matt. 7:21) True, good and saving works are ONLY produced by good and saving faith. Jesus knows the difference. Do you?

Can you quote the source? I’ve been Catholic all of my life and I have never encounter such theology… you may be glimming at the understanding that an empty Faith is nothing… we must accompany Faith with works in order to demonstrate to the world that we are a changed people:

First you must be saved. The difference between your position and mine is “evangelical.” Catholicism puts the emphasis on works, while the evangelical puts the emphasis on faith.

Example: Nicodemus has TONS of work, yet Jesus told him “Ye must be born again.” If Jesus had never said anything to Nicodemus, a Catholic would tell him that he had earned his way into heaven, that he was in a state of grace, because he had performed all that the church had required of him. Yet, Jesus did not give him that assurance, but told him he needed salvation.

The reconciliation is found in the fact that the confession must be genuine. People can give FALSE confessions, and they can give FALSE works. False works are the product of a FALSE confession. “A good tree CANNOT put forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree put forth good fruit.” (Matt. 7:18)

una fides:

Rather impossible to determine through human means since we cannot determine what truly lies in the heart/mind of man; yet, if we abide in Christ we will shine for the world to see since we would be one in Christ as we Love one another:

Amazing that you quote the same Scripture as myself, yet you fail to recognize that what I said is a mirror of what that Scripture said. Instead, you seem to be making believe that the Scripture does not say what it clearly states. “By their fruits you shall know them.” - Jesus

Now, if Jesus, himself, states that I will know them by their fruits, then it is clear that we are able to determine, to a great degree, who are those who are giving false confessions of Christianity and allegiance to Christ.

Who am I to believe? Christ, who said “You shall know them by their fruits”? Or you, who said "Rather impossible to determine through human means. . . "?

I think I’ll stick with the Word of God, thank you.

 

[PEPCIS]

Perhaps something is lost in the translation:

[SIGN][PEPCIS:] After all, it was Luther who came to this realization in the reading of Paul’s epistle to the Romans that resulted in his Protestant epiphany that “the just shall live by faith” means that nothing else is required for heaven except faith. The “live” in this context is spiritual life, not to be confused with earthly rewards or benefits, though there are oftentimes worldly benefits achieved through godly living.[/SIGN]

I cannot but conclude that you believe that the Church (all Christians throughout time) did not understand that we must have Faith and that only Luther was enlightened enough to discover such grand finding.

Then you would be concluding wrongly. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that a Catholic would miss the point. John 3:16 clearly states that “whoever believes [in Jesus] will have everlasting life. . .” Faith, according to Scripture, is a pre-requisite to everlasting life.

However, through hundreds of years of false teaching, the Catholic Church had turned the laity into drones who operated by works, instead of by faith. Instead of the format of the evangelicals whereby we insist that the congregant must begin in faith, the Catholic Church ignored this (and still does to this day) by placing the emphasis on being saved by Baptism (a work of man), instead of the Spiritual baptism of the Holy Spirit.
una fides:

If that is not exalting a man I don’t know what is!

Then you don’t know what it is. I proposed Luther as an example of one breaking out of the Catholic rut of WORKING your way to heaven - by relying on man’s good works and achievements, instead of resting in the finished work of Christ on the Cross.
una fides:

But you are wrong in your determination to state that Faith alone saves since not even Jesus made such a statement–quite the contrary, He demanded Obedience and adherence to Him as the only means to Salvation:

The problem with many Catholics (and a lot of Protestants) is that they misinterpret salvation to be “faith PLUS works” whereas James simply stated that works were inseparable from a saving faith. While the difference is subtle, it is a HUGE difference in practical and spiritual terms.

It’s like me saying that I get to work by my car, and then James comes along and says “You cannot get to work without the tires being put on the car.” They both say the same thing, but James goes a bit further in proving that a car without wheels is just as useless as faith without works.

 

[PEPCIS]

The Catholic position is that you must do good works out of faith and love and you must be in a state of grace (i.e. justified). We do not believe in a mere external observance of God’s commandments. So obviously if your good works are done out of hypocrisy, then they will not be pleasing to God. If anyone claims that Catholicism teaches that all that matters is good works, regardless of disposition, then they do not understand the Catholic position.

Moreover, if confession is a work, then Paul is very clear:

Romans 10:9

9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

He says believe AND confess and you will be saved, not believe alone and you will be saved. You may say that this confession is a work and yet Paul conditions salvation on faith and this work done in faith, not faith alone.

God Bless,
Michael

That was a good answer, and it is the RIGHT answer on how all believers should approach a holy life. It is exactly what James taught regarding faith and works. Yet I continue to stand by my position that the Catholic Church, by and large, teaches a works-based system of belief.

 

[mikeledes]

Confessing sins, in the tradition of the Catholic Church, is a work. It is a REQUIREMENT of those who wish to remain in grace (to go to heaven) to confess regularly. The seven sacraments of the Catholic Church are all about WORK, and have nothing to do with grace. Grace can only be received, and never earned.

This is incorrect. The sacraments are means established by Christ through which God bestows His grace. In other words, they are not works by which you earn grace. Rather, they are 7 ways God bestows His gifts.

2 Timothy 1:6

6 Therefore I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands.

My point is this. The fact that God choses to bestow a gift through a particular act - in this case, the laying on of hands - does not make that act a meritorious work or that which is recieved through that act something earned. Timothy subjected himself to this act (laying on of hands) and yet that which he received through this act is called a gift of God.

The Bible clearly states that God bestows the grace of justification through the sacrament of Baptism:

Acts 2:38

38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

We are to be baptized in the name of the Lord FOR the forgiveness of sins.

Acts 22:16

16’Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.'

This was the unanimous teaching of the Church for the first 300 years - as evidenced by the writings of early Church Fathers - and was the unanimous teaching of Christianity until John Calvin. “Faith alone” Martin Luther believed in baptismal regeneration and the Lutheran Church continues to teach that. In addition, “faith alone” Martin Luther also believed and taught confession and absolution, as does the Lutheran church today.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

That was a good answer, and it is the RIGHT answer on how all believers should approach a holy life. It is exactly what James taught regarding faith and works. Yet I continue to stand by my position that the Catholic Church, by and large, teaches a works-based system of belief.

Okay. So I present to you the Catholic position and you said that is what James taught regarding faith and works. But then you still stand by your position that the Church teaches a works-based sytem of belief? Why?

God bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Please. It is more than abundantly clear that the Catholic church teaches that whether or not someone goes to heaven is based on whether or not that person dies in a state of grace. In other words, if that person is not producing good works to indicate his state of grace, and he dies without receiving the “last rites”, he will have died outside of grace.

I’m not sure how it is that Catholics can say with a straight face that they do not believe that you must work your way to get to heaven, and then out of the other side of their mouth claim that they do not believe that once you are saved, that you are always saved.

First of all, the Catholic Church teaches that to live and die in a state of grace is a gift of God not given on the basis of works. This gift we call “final perseverance.” This is something you can pray for, but you cannot work for.

Secondly, Martin Luther believed in faith alone and yet also believed that salvation can be lost through grave sin. So are you saying that Martin Luther also believed that you must work your way to get to heaven?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[PEPCIS]

Can you cite a single example where “forgotten” is used in this way in the Bible, the Greek, or English language?

That’s a good, and legitimate, question. The short answer is “No.” I cannot find anywhere else in the Bible where “forgotten” is used in the same way. However, this is the only way that it can be interpreted given the full context of the Bible.

You are taking “forgotten” to mean “the opposite of remember.” But the context clearly shows that it is being used as a euphemism for “nothing to remember.” There is nothing to remember, because no saving grace has been imparted to this person.

The context of the Bible is clear in this regard. Christ’s teachings help us to see that only those who persevere to the end will enter heaven, but He does not teach or mean that all who entered the path to heaven are true believers.

mikeledes:

You are bending the rules of grammar and semantics to suit your view.

Let’s be clear here: I’m being consistent. I’m not bending “rules of grammar and semantics” just to make it say what I want it to say. I’m USING proper rules of grammar and semantics that will maintain a consistent context with the WHOLE TEACHING OF THE BIBLE.

If you and I were going to the movies, and when we arrived at the theatre, you asked me to pay because you “forgot” your wallet, I have one of two things that I can do to interpret what you mean when you say “forgot.”

1. 
   *]To maintain friendship, I can ASSUME that you mean you honestly forgot your wallet.
   *]I can gauge the truthfulness of your claim against your past actions.
   
   In the first case, I interpret words in their literal meaning, while in the second case, I interpret words in the greater context of their meaning. Gauging your truthfulness by your past actions is a means of interpreting your words in the greater context of their meaning. Either you are using “forgot” in a literal sense, or you are using it in the sense that you didn’t really forget, but the end result is the same – you don’t have your wallet and you need me to pay for your ticket.
   
   In the same token, either you really forgot you were saved, or you didn’t really forget, but the end result is the same – you don’t get to go to heaven.
   
   Of course, this doesn’t mean that both interpretations are correct. Only one can be correct. The first could be correct, IF IT FITS THE GREATER CONTEXT AND TEACHINGS of the Bible as a whole. However, as we examine the greater context of the Bible, we find that it is inconsistent with the teachings of Jesus and the writers of the Bible to believe that one can “forget” that they were saved.
   
   
   mikeledes:
   

   Let’s read what Peter said:
   
   [SIGN]9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins. [2 Peter 1:9][/SIGN]
   
   It says HE WAS (past tense) CLEANSED FROM HIS SINS. There is an original event to remember and this person had failed to remember this. If you have “nothing to remember”, then BY DEFINITION, you have not forgotten anything. If I never knew name, then according to standard use of the word, I could not have “forgotten” it.

   Those are some good observations, but you are sticking with a literal reading of the terms. As I noted, that interpretation is inconsistent with the full context of the Bible.
   
   
   mikeledes:
   

   Moreover, the Catholic position is that a dead faith CANNOT save. The faith that saves is the faith that works through love and thus produces good works.

   That’s the Protestant faith.