I am a Protestant who wants an honest answer

[exrc]

Hey Phil,

Would you like to help me define those terms in post #1115?

Maria,

What about the rest of the terms?

Dan

 

[exrc]

Cubby:

You ask what the scriptures say - and I must say that I am still learning! However, it makes sense to trust the church fathers and 2000 years of church knowledge. By what justification do you disregard these resources?

"For I (55) did not shrink from declaring to you the whole (56) purpose of God.
28 "Be on guard for yourselves and for all (57) the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd (58) the church of God which (59) He purchased with His own blood.
29 ** "I know that after my departure (60**) savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing (61) the flock;
30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away (62) the disciples after them.
31 "Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of (63) three years I did not cease to admonish each one

My discussions with my Independent Baptist friend have been the beginning of my real research of the scriptures. I was hoping you were an Independent Baptist so that I could pick your brain in regards to those teachings…

That should have been your first endeavor. That is the way I found, my church home. 3 months of independent study of scripture,as per John 16:13, then voila! God is good!

I want to pick your brain anyway! On another thread the subject of “baptism by desire” was introduced to me. Now, is this really Catholic theology? (I don’t know) - But if you’re not baptized then it seems that the only thing that saves those persons is faith in Christ. Because I can’t find the desire to be baptized as being a valid sacrament… HELP! Pax? Phil?, thoughts too!?

Don’t go any further cubby, faith is all you need to save you. Stay in scripture.

Your friend Dan!

 

[Ozzie]

Cubby:

Why do you leave out John 3:19-21? (Interestingly enough, this deals with works - associated with coming to the light).Those verses are decribing those who refuse to believe in Christ. Christ is the Light and they refuse to come to Him (believe) for salvation. They enjoy their darkness and hate the light. This has nothing to do with works. Faith is not a work!!

Where do you get your information? To say that the sacraments of the Church are focused on sin and binds us? Is this just your personal opinion? Or do you have other sources?Do you sin, Cubby? And when you do, how are you forgiven?

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge”. Proverbs 1:7The “fear” that even one sin has the power to cancel out the cross of Christ is not knowledge at all. It’s error, and your knowledge has not even begun.

Yes, “the baptism of desire” is a RC doctrine. I hear Karl Keating refer to it on the radio. It’s not Biblical, its RC.

 

[Ozzie]

Pax:

If you are not sorry for the sins you commit from day to day, then those sins will not be forgiven.

By this one statement you cancel out, even reject, the truth of the cross. But you are quintessentially RC. No Scriptures revealing God’s infinite GRACE toward man through Christ’s cross will penetrate a mind bent on legalism. In the Gospel message, my friend, BELIEF is the issue, not sin (Jn. 3:14-18). You need to start there. You throw verses at me left and right. But never passages that speak of God’s infinte grace, belief and eternal life. How about Jn. 3:14-18, give me your exposition.

 

[Cubby]

Ozzie:

Do you sin, Cubby? And when you do, how are you forgiven?The “fear” that even one sin has the power to cancel out the cross of Christ is not knowledge at all. It’s error, and your knowledge has not even begun.

Yes, “the baptism of desire” is a RC doctrine. I hear Karl Keating refer to it on the radio. It’s not Biblical, its RC.

How are my sins forgiven? Well, I’ve learned that the power to forgive sins was given to the apostles by Christ himself, and that that power has been passed on through the years to the apostalate of the Catholic church. The process and sacrament of reconcilliation (confession) includes seeing a priest, saying a prayer of repentance to Jesus, receiving forgivness from the priest, and then following that up with penance.

I have met many Catholics, and have yet to meet someone who comes to confession out of fear, or living in fear. It is quite the contrary. If you could see the fruits of this sacrament you might change your harsh overtones against it!

It statements like “your knowledge has not even begun” that make your arguments less likely to be believed. Arrogance, rudeness, and the like are not fruits of the Spirit, Ozzie. And the Word says that we will recognize each other by our fruits. Why do you come across so? Is it intentional, or am I misinterpetting (easy to do in e-mails, I’m sure you know).

But on baptism of desire, this truly troubles me. What is this based on guys?

Cubby

 

[Philthy]

Cubby:

You ask what the scriptures say - and I must say that I am still learning! However, it makes sense to trust the church fathers and 2000 years of church knowledge. By what justification do you disregard these resources?

You will forever be learning. Your question is critical. Never forget that literacy was rare and that there were no NT writings available to most Christians for hundreds of years. How could anyone claim authority? From whom did they recieve it and how did they know?

Cubby:
My discussions with my Independent Baptist friend have been the beginning of my real research of the scriptures. I was hoping you were an Independent Baptist so that I could pick your brain in regards to those teachings…
Realize that they, like every denomination - including The Catholic Church - will have an agenda. The question will become, “Does there teaching stand up to the scrutiny of Scriptural and historical research?” You will see a marked difference between the Catholic Church and the Protestant churches in this regard.

Cubby:

I want to pick your brain anyway! On another thread the subject of “baptism by desire” was introduced to me. Now, is this really Catholic theology? (I don’t know) - But if you’re not baptized then it seems that the only thing that saves those persons is faith in Christ. Because I can’t find the desire to be baptized as being a valid sacrament… HELP! Pax? Phil?, thoughts too!?

You need to get yourself a copy of the Catechism. I believe there are 3 valid baptisms in the Catholic Church: Water, Blood and desire. But I will simply caution you, before you start digging in to specific doctrinal issues to start with some fundamental questions:
Where did the bible come from?
How do we know the Bible is what it claims to be?
Can I read and interpret the Bible myself?
What happens when I read something in the Bible and my interpretation is different than someone elses? Do I stick with my interpretation? Is there a higher authority than my interpretation? Why? Who established the “higher authority”?

Phil

 

[Cubby]

Philthy:

You will forever be learning. Your question is critical. Never forget that literacy was rare and that there were no NT writings available to most Christians for hundreds of years. How could anyone claim authority? From whom did they recieve it and how did they know?
Realize that they, like every denomination - including The Catholic Church - will have an agenda. The question will become, “Does there teaching stand up to the scrutiny of Scriptural and historical research?” You will see a marked difference between the Catholic Church and the Protestant churches in this regard.

You need to get yourself a copy of the Catechism. I believe there are 3 valid baptisms in the Catholic Church: Water, Blood and desire. But I will simply caution you, before you start digging in to specific doctrinal issues to start with some fundamental questions:
Where did the bible come from?
How do we know the Bible is what it claims to be?
Can I read and interpret the Bible myself?
What happens when I read something in the Bible and my interpretation is different than someone elses? Do I stick with my interpretation? Is there a higher authority than my interpretation? Why? Who established the “higher authority”?

Phil
Thanks Phil. I have been referencing the Catechism via the online version at vatican.va. I’ll take a dive into it in regards to baptism.

Cubby

 

[Catherine_S]

SPOKENWORD:

IF once saved always saved is true what purpose does the story of the Prodigal Son serve.? God Bless.

This article… is most insightful … it covers and brings much clarification on these topics which we have discussed.

Jerry L Wallis
"Quote"
… Yet it raises a** substantive issue** that Christians who take the afterlife seriously cannot evade. It is here that “an indiscreet theological question” must be faced. If salvation** essentially** involves transformation—and, at that same time, we cannot be united with God unless we are holy—what becomes of those who plead the atonement of Christ for salvation but die before they have been thoroughly transformed? These people will have accepted the truth about God and themselves through repentance and faith, but their character will not have been made perfect. Their sanctification has begun but it remains incomplete.

…What I have in mind are the many beliefs shared by Roman Catholics and evangelicals concerning,** in particular, the nature of salvation.** This growing consensus was expressed most notably in “The Gift of Salvation,” **a document **signed by a number of leading Roman Catholic and evangelical spokesmen, which reiterates the classical view thatthere is **a close relationship between justification **and sanctification. Salvation, in this view, is far more than forgiveness of our sins; it is also a matter of thorough moral and spiritual transformation. The document stresses this point by denying that faith is mere intellectual assent and asserting that it is “an act of the whole person, involving the mind, the will, and the affections, issuing in a changed life.” It then goes on to **insist **that Christians are bound by their faith and baptism “to live according to the law of love in obedience to Jesus Christ the Lord. Scripture calls this the life of holiness or sanctification.”

…It is here that “an indiscreet theological question” must be faced. If salvation **essentially **involves transformation—and, at that same time, we cannot be united with God unless we are holy—what becomes of those who plead the atonement of Christ for salvation but die before they have been thoroughly transformed? These people will have accepted the truth about God and themselves through repentance and faith, but their character will not have been made perfect. Their sanctification has begun but it remains incomplete.

firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0204/articles/walls.html

Shalom

 

[Ozzie]

Philthy:

Yup, the final solution that doesn’t solve anything until we have faith. am I right? - This is now a new topic (and probably THE topic): Is the efficacy of Christs sacrifice complete at the time of faith? I know you have good, Scriptural reasons for believing the answer to be yes.

Let me try to explain again. The sacrifice of Christ was efficacious in and of itself, irregardless of whether or not anyone subsequently believed in Him. For instance, “propitiation” is one of the doctrines of the cross. It has nothing to do with you or me, it is strictly between the Father and the Son. The Man, Jesus Christ, i.e., His sacrificial work on the cross, is the propitiation for the sins of the world (1 Jn. 2:2; 4:10). His blood sacrifice “propitiated” God, that is, completely satisfied God’s offended holiness because of the world’s sin. When God saw the blood He was appeased. Our faith had/has nothing to do with producing this divinely, intended effect. His blood was completely efficacious in respect to propitiating God. In fact, it was God Himself who sent the Son into this world to be the propitiation for our sins, and His blood sacrifice was the means by which this would be effected. And “propitiate” He did, completely, perfectly and once-for-all. God never looks to you or me to appease, or satisfy, His offended holiness because of sin, or even when we sin (this would include confessing them). His offense, even wrath, toward sin was appeased completely and perfectly 2000 years ago through the shed blood of Christ there on the cross.

Now this same sacrificial principle applies to reconciliation and redemption, the other two doctrines of the cross. Irregardless of anyone subsequently believing in Christ or not. His sacrificial work, there on the cross, was sufficient to produce divine reconciliation for all sinners, and their eternal redemption, i.e., to eternally purchase any sinner from the slave market of sin by the ransom price of His blood. One’s belief in Christ has NOTHING to do with the efficacy of this glorious, sacrificial work. We do not share in its sufficiency what-so-ever!! The one who puts His faith in Christ simply becomes a beneficiary of His perfect, compete and efficacious work on the cross at the time of personal faith. Our faith in Him does not make His sacrificial work “efficacious,” as if it is our faith that puts a stamp of approval on it, or gives it its potency (now don’t come right back at me by saying that’s not what you said. Think about this awhile, please!).

His sacrificial work on the cross was completely and perfectly propitiatory, reconciliatory and redemptive in and of itself. That is the nature of a SUBSTITUTIONARY sacrifice, which Christ’s was! Our faith IN HIM does not give it its propitiatory, reconciliatory or redemptive power - His substitutionary sacrifice, intrinsically, has that power because that was its divine purpose, its divine intent. But by GRACE we receive from God, gift wise, the full eternal benefits of divine salvation (eternal reconciliation to God and redemption, the forgiveness of our sins) wrought by His Son’s sacrificial work on the cross 2000 years ago (Eph. 2:8-9).

The cross is “good news” my friend. That’s why it’s called “good” Friday.

 

[SPOKENWORD]

Yes it is all about the cross. Its all about being saved by the BLOOD. Anyone that preaches a different gospel. BEWARE. God Bless.

 

[Philthy]

exrc:

Phil and Maria,

Let’s define some terms for the sake of clarification. I think if we get a fix on that, we can argue more effectively.

These definitions must however be biblical. In other words derived using only biblical references.OK?
If you would like to add any, feel free.
I think if you do this you will find a difference with what you say you believe and what you really believe.
In love Dan!

Dan- when you say the definition must be biblical we need some clarity. I don’t believe the bible “defines” words( perhaps with the exception of faith) but that an understanding of the words can be derived from their contextual use in scripture. This, of course, means we “define” them based on our own interpretation of their context. We will be running in circles again shortly.
You still haven’t given me a satisfactory answer as to why anyone who confesses Jesus is Lord and believes that God raised him from the dead is not saved. You imposed some personal qualifications on the simple statement by Paul (Rom 10:9-10) without just cause.

Dan:

The conditional is **confessing **Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart.Thats all!

I do both, but that’s not good enough for you…

Dan:

Your problem is that you are not believing this promise fully, that’s the key.

This isn’t the key to anything. This is you pulling something out of your magic hat. It’s a statement of your opinion.
Why have we drifted from Scripture? Why do we jump from Scripture and then a non-Scriptural condition of that belief? As I told you read verse 13. What does it say? "For EVERYONE who CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD will be SAVED." Paul seems much less strict than you are - I’ll stand with him. You, my friend, are picking and choosing Scripture to fit your own agenda. You probably don’t even realize it. You have judged my faith and that is not your job - you’re not qualified. :tsktsk: Never were and never will be.

Phil

 

[Coder]

Believing is an act of an entire life - not just a verbal statement. A verbal statement means nothing if it is not lived.

A person can not claim to have truly believed until they die having lived a holy unselfish life full of love for others and conquering evil pride.

To say you believe is just empty words. Means nothing until you prove it by your life and obedience to Jesus’ Church once you know the truth.

Talk is cheap - it has to be backed up by action motivated by love and obedience to Jesus.

Sinful pride concerned with image and appearing to be right is not a sign of Christian faith. Show me a kind humble person and I will show you a Christian. That’s evidence of real faith.

Pride is a real problem and it is overcome by joy and humility.

 

[Pax]

Ozzie:

By this one statement you cancel out, even reject, the truth of the cross. But you are quintessentially RC. No Scriptures revealing God’s infinite GRACE toward man through Christ’s cross will penetrate a mind bent on legalism. In the Gospel message, my friend, BELIEF is the issue, not sin (Jn. 3:14-18). You need to start there. You throw verses at me left and right. But never passages that speak of God’s infinte grace, belief and eternal life. How about Jn. 3:14-18, give me your exposition.

You could not be more wrong and you know it. If you don’t know it then you should know it. Everything you’ve claimed against us in this post has previously been refuted with scripture. You only believe those parts of scripture that please you.

 

[Pax]

Ozzie:

… No Scriptures revealing God’s infinite GRACE toward man through Christ’s cross will penetrate a mind bent on legalism. In the Gospel message, my friend, BELIEF is the issue, not sin (Jn. 3:14-18). You need to start there. You throw verses at me left and right. But never passages that speak of God’s infinte grace, belief and eternal life. How about Jn. 3:14-18, give me your exposition.

Ozzie,

I really am surprised that you would make this remark. I have in several posts commented extensively on the power of God’s grace and how Catholic teaching fully embraces God’s grace in ways that Protestant teaching fails to. When I did this, you never commented or disagreed, but now you make a silly remark that claims that we are simply legalists that cannot appreciate the infinite power of God’s grace. I find that odd and clearly off the mark.

As far as John 3:14-18 is concerned let me begin by saying that I am not surprised that you would ask only for my “exposition.” Obviously, whatever I provide will fail to meet “your” contextual test or be a of a quality to be considered “exegesis.” Hopelessly, steeped in legalism, we Catholics are incapable of anything more than mere exposition.

And yes, we have thrown an enormous amount of scripture at you. In fact it may be enough scripture to actually establish the general context of the NT. All in all, the verses we have provided speak volumes about the power of God and His infinite mercy and grace. If you find these verses to be legalistic then your argument is with the inspired word and not with us.

But back to John 3:14-18…the first thing I will say to these verses is “Amen and praise God for His infinite love and mercy.”
Beyond that these verses are written in the context of baptism and being born again. The one who believes walks in the light and in truth and is saved. The unbeliever, willfully rejecting the truth, is already condemned. The two most important things in this Chapter of John’s gospel are being born again and believing in Jesus. The depth of understanding this in its fullness is where Catholic teaching exceeds most Protestant thought.

It is our belief that the born again person is “regenerated.” The sinful nature that we have in our unregenerated state is replaced by a regenerated nature with life in the Spirit. This means that we put sin aside and are fed and led by God’s grace. It is by God’s grace that we receive the supernatural gifts of faith, hope, and charity. It is by God’s grace that we are lifted out of sin and can do his will. Read the first letter of John and you will see how this is so.

Naturally, none of this is possbile without faith in Jesus as our Lord, Prophet, Priest, King, and Divine Savior. Belief needs to be understood in its fullness to be appreciated. It is not simple intellectual assent. Belief by Jewish definitions and by Catholic definitions fits perfectly with the aforementioned titles. Lordship and Kingship require faithfulness and obedience in all things. The beauty and power of God’s grace is that it enables us to believe, to love, to obey, and to worship God and thus please Him as adopted sons and daughters. That is what belief and regeneration are all about.

Much more could be said about these passages but time and space do not permit me to comment further. I hope this begins to clarify a few things for you.

 

[Pax]

Ozzie:

…This has nothing to do with works. Faith is not a work!!..

Ozzie,

You have denied that faith is a gift which is contrary to scripture and contrary to every denominations understanding of faith from scripture.

Faith is also a work and I showed you from scripture that this is also true. You had no refutation from scripture of the biblical passages I quoted that demonstrated that “faith” has both characteristics, yet you are at it again.

Please go back a ways and read my posts that addressed these issues. If you find that too difficult I will re-post the scripture verses that demonstrate all of this for you.

 

[exrc]

Philthy:

Dan- when you say the definition must be biblical we need some clarity. I don’t believe the bible “defines” words( perhaps with the exception of faith) but that an understanding of the words can be derived from their contextual use in scripture. This, of course, means we

“define” them based on our own interpretation of their context. We will be running in circles again shortly. Let’s have a whack at it anyway.

You still haven’t given me a satisfactory answer as to why anyone who confesses Jesus is Lord and believes that God raised him from the dead is not saved. You imposed some personal qualifications on the simple statement by Paul (Rom 10:9-10) without just cause.

I do both, but that’s not good enough for you…

If you have done these both, then this is good. However, when you start to deny the gift by faith, and turn to works for further justification, you believe another gospel, and another Jesus.

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the** grace** of Christ and are turning to a different gospel, 7which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!.(Letter to the Roman Catholics 1:6-9)NIV

know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ.!.(Letter to the Roman Catholics 2:15)NIV

2I would like to learn just one thing from you PHIL: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? 3Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?.!.(Letter to the Roman Catholics 3:2-3) NIV

Please get on track Phil, before it’s too late.

Your friend Dan!

 

[exrc]

Ozzie:

Let me try to explain again. The sacrifice of Christ was efficacious in and of itself, irregardless of whether or not anyone subsequently believed in Him. For instance, “propitiation” is one of the doctrines of the cross. It has nothing to do with you or me, it is strictly between the Father and the Son. The Man, Jesus Christ, i.e., His sacrificial work on the cross, is the propitiation for the sins of the world (1 Jn. 2:2; 4:10). His blood sacrifice “propitiated” God, that is, completely satisfied God’s offended holiness because of the world’s sin. When God saw the blood He was appeased. Our faith had/has nothing to do with producing this divinely, intended effect. His blood was completely efficacious in respect to propitiating God. In fact, it was God Himself who sent the Son into this world to be the propitiation for our sins, and His blood sacrifice was the means by which this would be effected. And “propitiate” He did, completely, perfectly and once-for-all. God never looks to you or me to appease, or satisfy, His offended holiness because of sin, or even when we sin (this would include confessing them). His offense, even wrath, toward sin was appeased completely and perfectly 2000 years ago through the shed blood of Christ there on the cross.

Now this same sacrificial principle applies to reconciliation and redemption, the other two doctrines of the cross. Irregardless of anyone subsequently believing in Christ or not. His sacrificial work, there on the cross, was sufficient to produce divine reconciliation for all sinners, and their eternal redemption, i.e., to eternally purchase any sinner from the slave market of sin by the ransom price of His blood. One’s belief in Christ has NOTHING to do with the efficacy of this glorious, sacrificial work. We do not share in its sufficiency what-so-ever!! The one who puts His faith in Christ simply becomes a beneficiary of His perfect, compete and efficacious work on the cross at the time of personal faith. Our faith in Him does not make His sacrificial work “efficacious,” as if it is our faith that puts a stamp of approval on it, or gives it its potency (now don’t come right back at me by saying that’s not what you said. Think about this awhile, please!).

His sacrificial work on the cross was completely and perfectly propitiatory, reconciliatory and redemptive in and of itself. That is the nature of a SUBSTITUTIONARY sacrifice, which Christ’s was! Our faith IN HIM does not give it its propitiatory, reconciliatory or redemptive power - His substitutionary sacrifice, intrinsically, has that power because that was its divine purpose, its divine intent. But by GRACE we receive from God, gift wise, the full eternal benefits of divine salvation (eternal reconciliation to God and redemption, the forgiveness of our sins) wrought by His Son’s sacrificial work on the cross 2000 years ago (Eph. 2:8-9).

The cross is “good news” my friend. That’s why it’s called “good” Friday.

Really good stuff OZ!:tiphat:

 

[Ozzie]

Catherine S.:

…It is here that “an indiscreet theological question” must be faced. If salvation **essentially **involves transformation—and, at that same time, we cannot be united with God unless we are holy—what becomes of those who plead the atonement of Christ for salvation but die before they have been thoroughly transformed? These people will have accepted the truth about God and themselves through repentance and faith, but their character will not have been made perfect. Their sanctification has begun but it remains incomplete.

This man understands nothing regarding the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ as revealed in Scripture. There’s no such notion in Scripture as a transformation for salvation. Such teaching denies the cross of Christ.

1COR. 1:2 “to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:”

1COR/ 6:11 “And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.”

HEB 2:11 “For both He who sanctifies and those who *are sanctified *are all from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren,”

HEB 10:10 "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

It is the saved who have been sanctified in Christ.

 

[Catherine_S]

Ozzie:

This man understands nothing regarding the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ as revealed in Scripture. There’s no such notion in Scripture as a transformation for salvation. Such teaching denies the cross of Christ.

1COR. 1:2 “to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:”

1COR/ 6:11 “And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.”

HEB 2:11 “For both He who sanctifies and those who *are sanctified *are all from one Father; for which reason He is not
ashamed to call them brethren,”

HEB 10:10 "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

It is the saved who have been sanctified in Christ.

"For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, **and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart" (Heb. 4:12). **

---

Shalom

 

[Cubby]

exrc:

Don’t go any further cubby, faith is all you need to save you. Stay in scripture.

Your friend Dan!

I appreciate your intentions Dan. Thanks for the encouragement, but even though I don’t think I’ll ever lose faith in the Catholic doctrine (but I am going to read through the Catechism and question everything!).

I do appreciate seeing things from another angle. The Catholic church is as close as I can get to the era of Christ, here in 2004. Not only that, but my whole being (body & spirit) is at peace with my relationship with Christ through the Catholic church. I am convinced that it’s the church Christ founded - and it may look different to you if you go back and visit after being out for a while?

Either way, I hope to see you in Glory!

Cubby

PS: Same to you, Ozzie.

PS2: Same to all you “Phil’s” :yup: