How To Get To Heaven When You Die

  • Thread starter Thread starter xfrodobagginsx
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Frodobaggins, I’ve asked you repeatedly some very simple questions. Can babies too young for faith be saved? If so, how? What washes away a baby’s original sin? You made a vague reference to an un-Biblical term “age of accountability” but never supplied any Biblical support for it. Since the Bible doesn’t show any “age of accountability” and since you believe that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” are babies who die doomed to hell because they lack faith?
This is an excellent point. I’ve always thought that requiring a declaration of faith, e.g., I accept Jesus as my personal savior, to be salvation based upon works. You recite a magic formula, and you’re in! Too bad about the babies, and those who’ve never heard of our Lord.

We are saved by God’s grace. Yes, through faith is the ordinary means, but there are extraordinary cases, and God’s grace isn’t subject to our limitations.
 
Frodobaggins, I’ve asked you repeatedly some very simple questions. Can babies too young for faith be saved? If so, how? What washes away a baby’s original sin? You made a vague reference to an un-Biblical term “age of accountability” but never supplied any Biblical support for it. Since the Bible doesn’t show any “age of accountability” and since you believe that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” are babies who die doomed to hell because they lack faith?
I have already addressed this issue. Check the past posts.
 
jmrae made a good point, frodo. You would to read it careful.

I also like to state that we are judge by our actions not by faith.

The Scripture and the Catholic Church strongly affirms this very clearly.

Matthew 25:31-46 made this point very clearly.

It reads:

frodo, my friend. Like I said, we are **not judge by our faith **but we are judge what we do in this life.
Wrong. We are judged by the word of God. What do you think believing in Christ is? It’s placing your FAITH in HIM for salvation. The bible clearly states that this is the only way to heaven. Here are some verses regarding faith.

Ga 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Hab 2:4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

Ro 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

Heb 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
 
I have two other statements to make on the matter, and unless frodo actually answers the questions I have raised before, I just won’t follow this thread anymore.
  1. Have you considered that the reason Paul doesn’t mention baptism over and over again in his letters to established churches of baptized Christians is that they are already baptized, and there isn’t re-baptism? He is reminding them of the grace which enabled them to have faith in the first place. He is emphasizing what must be done now that they are baptized. They must keep faith. They must have love. They must lead lives worthy of the calling they have answered.
  2. Of the three things here, which is passive? a) Believe in Jesus as your Savior; b) Repent of your sins; c) Be baptized. It’s the third one, c. Baptism is something you have happen to you, it’s not something you do. In other words, you have to believe and repent… we’ll take care of the baptism part.
I have refuted this but the mods saw fit to erase my post 🤷
 
Evidence? From Foxe??
:rolleyes: Okayyyyyy…And now, for another dandy “historical” read, may I suggest ‘Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea’, & ‘Around the World In Eighty Days’???
Frodo, the book is fiction. It’s made up stories. It is NOT historical truth; its political propaganda.

Oh, trust me, I know the book. I have read the book.
It’s a pack of farradiddles.
Foxe was writing to inflame hatred for Catholics, because it was :mad: “politically correct”, in his day, to:eek: lie about Catholics.
Have you ever checked with any honest scholar, on how Foxe’s Book of Martyrs is regarded by people who know & understnad history?
It is universally regarded as a:shrug: bad joke to even discuss the charges he flings about, because anyone who knows history, knows that** the whole thing is a pack of lies**.
Get over it, and move on. All that anyone hearing you talk about it as source material is going to do, is to snort over your credulousness. I’m sorry, but the truth is the truth, & John Foxe was a scoundrel with an eye for political posturing, who wrote what those in power in England wanted to pass off on the world.
In simpler terms: The man was a liar.
Just like it was “poltically correct” for 1400 years for the catholic church to MURDER christians. Read the book and by the way, are all of it’s sources lying as well?

Here is a link to download the entire book:

ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/begin.htm

By the way, the first catholic was constantine. He merged the pegan religion in with Christianity and came up with catholisim. That’s why they keep all those idols around still to this day. Therefore, peter wasn’t the first pope of the catholic church as your church contends. He was murdered by nero of rome. 🤷

When you click on the link the first chapter covers how the disciples were murdered, except for the apostle John.
 
Just like it was “poltically correct” for 1400 years for the catholic church to MURDER christians. Read the book and by the way, are all of it’s sources lying as well?

Here is a link to download the entire book:

ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/begin.htm
Um, Zooey has read the book. Have you read the introduction? You know, where it says that it’s not historically accurate?

For one thing, he lists Anne Boleyn as a martyr. Rubbish.
By the way, the first catholic was constantine. He merged the pegan religion in with Christianity and came up with catholisim. That’s why they keep all those idols around still to this day. Therefore, peter wasn’t the first pope of the catholic church as your church contends. He was murdered by nero of rome.
What is your source for this mis-information? The Catholic Church was NOT an invention of Constantine!

Ignatius of Antioch in 107 AD, wrote: “Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” It had to have been already well-known as “Catholic” for Ignatius to write it thus.
 
It’s one of the facets of the Gospel that a lot of Protestants ignore, that while we are unworthy of the grace we receive we are expected to live worthily as Christians. Most non-Catholics will never say they’re trying to be “worthy” of anything because they can’t be. That’s not what the Gospels say, that’s not what Paul’s letters say (as I explain in the second half of this blog post, some of which I’ve already written up in this thread, none of which xfrodobagginsx has responded to).
That’s just not true. We try to live worthy of our salvation. What are you talking about?
 
Nope, why don’t you point it out for us all to see. I posted the link for all to read.

Here it is again:

ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/begin.htm
Most of us have read Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. Telling us over and over to read it accomplishes little. We have read it and we know it is inaccurate. However, I will certainly agree that even one murder committed in Jesus’ name is an atrocity — regardless of whether the victim is Catholic or Protestant, and regardless of whether the perpetrator is Catholic or Protestant. So what? How does that pertain to “How to get to heaven when you die?”
 
I have already addressed this issue. Check the past posts.
I did check the past posts. Repeatedly. You never answered.

It’s a simple question: do babies who die go to hell, since they lack faith? Yes or no? If not, what saves them?
 
Nope, why don’t you point it out for us all to see. I posted the link for all to read.
It’s found here.

In case you don’t wish to click the link:
John Foxe or Fox (1518-1587), a staunchly Protestant divine, wrote his book as this story seen from the Protestant point of view. The Acts and Monuments of the Christian Church, better known as Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, was first published in English in 1563. (see Bibliographic Note). **In this enormously long history of the Church from the death of Christ to the accession of Queen Elizabeth I, he is anxious to prove firstly the complete hatefulness, evil and corruption of the Catholic church, the papacy and the monastic orders, and secondly to assert the right of the monarch to appoint bishops and clergy, and to dispose of church property and income at will. Everything (and that means everything) which supports this view goes in; everything which does not is either left out, glossed over, or rejected as ipso facto untrue because asserted by his opponents. If his sources support his prejudices, his credulity knows no bounds; he is as ready to peddle the myth of Jewish blood-sacrifices of Christian children as he is to believe in the foundation of the church in England by Joseph of Arimathea. **When he gets closer to his own times, however, his accounts are in most cases taken from eye-witness evidence or official documents and must be accepted as basically factual. There is no doubt that Protestants were savagely persecuted by Henry VIII and especially by Mary I and that this contributed to the fear and hatred which animates the book. The gruesome and enormously detailed accounts of the martyrdoms of Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer and all the other victims of Bloody Mary’s tyranny are sober fact. Nonetheless, any students tempted to regard the book as a work of history are warned to check anything Foxe says with some more even-handed historian before reproducing it. (We recommend Reformation: Europe’s House Divided by Diarmaid MacCulloch)
 
And what is the meaning of this one?

See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2:24.

IF what you say is true, then it seems the Scriptures are contradicting themselves. Now we both know the Scriptures are infallible, because the infallible Church Christ founded taught you so about 1,600 years ago.

It seems your interpretation of Paul is not quite what Paul had in mind.
No, you don’t understand the context of James.

If you study the context of that verse, it is talking about true faith produces works, but it’s not the works that save.

Have you kept the whole law perfectly?

Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

That’s why we are under GRACE, not works.
 
Am I talking to myself? Frodo, most of us HAVE read Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. You can keep posting the link over and over but that just proves you’ve got nothing to add when we tell you that we HAVE read it and we know it is unreliable. It’s similar (although not as egregious) to telling a Jewish person to go read “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” All you’re achieving is to reveal the depths of your prejudice. We HAVE read Foxe, and we see it for what it is.
 
No, you don’t understand the context of James.

If you study the context of that verse, it is talking about true faith produces works, but it’s not the works that save.
No. That isn’t the “context” of James at all. James 2:24 plainly, directly, vividly says that we are justified BY works and not by faith alone (and it is the ONLY time that the phrase “faith alone” appears in Scripture). He does NOT say that works are the mere fruits of faith. He says that works justify us. This is precisely why Martin Luther wanted to rip the entire letter of James out of the Bible, like he did with the deuterocanonical Old Testament books.
 
Nope, why don’t you point it out for us all to see. I posted the link for all to read.

Here it is again:

ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/begin.htm
Hmm. I just browsed the book again, not for individual accounts but for completeness. I will let others comment on the accuracy of the book. I do have a few comments on the completeness of the book.

First I was disappointed that all of the anabaptist martyrs were missing. I was curious whether the book would mention Michael Sattler (martyred by the Catholics) but not Felix Manz (martyred by the reformed). Instead the book mentions none of them.

The book does mention Michael Servetus (martyred by John Calvin). However the tone of the book shifts from an accusatory tone when the victims are Protestants killed by Catholic to an apologetic of Calvin in this case.

The book makes no mention of Catholic martyrs at the hands of Protestants (for example in Britain and Ireland).

The book makes no mention of Catholic martyrs at the hands of non-Christians (for example the 26 martyrs in Nagasaki Japan in 1597).

I will leave to others to evaluate whether these omissions are a result of an agenda by the author. But I will note that the primary way in which our news is biased is not in what is reported, but in what is omitted.
 
Wrong. We are judged by the word of God.
Really? That is not what my Bible says.

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing in the presence of the throne, and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged by those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13 And the sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and hell gave up their dead that were in them; and they were judged every one according to their works.

Matthew 25:31-46 reads:
31 And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty. 32 And all nations shall be gathered together before him, and he shall separate them one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. 34 Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in:

36 Naked, and you covered me: sick, and you visited me: I was in prison, and you came to me. 37 Then shall the just answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, and fed thee; thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38 And when did we see thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and covered thee? 39 Or when did we see thee sick or in prison, and came to thee? 40 And the king answering, shall say to them: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren, you did it to me.

41 Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat: I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink. 43 I was a stranger, and you took me not in: naked, and you covered me not: sick and in prison, and you did not visit me. 44 Then they also shall answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister to thee? 45 Then he shall answer them, saying: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to me. 46 And these shall go into everlasting punishment: but the just, into life everlasting.
What do you think believing in Christ is? It’s placing your FAITH in HIM for salvation. The bible clearly states that this is the only way to heaven. Here are some verses regarding faith.
Ga 3:11
Heb 11:6
Hab 2:4
Ro 1:17
Heb 10:38
:amen: Catholics believe every word of those verses! The problem, (for you at least) is that we do not believe your personal interpretation of them, which asserts that we are save by “faith alone” which is not what the Word of God teaches. Sola Fide - Salvation by Faith Alone
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top