I was converted from Catholicism to Christ at the age of 19.

[sandusky]

benedictus2:

Well, well. Let’s go back to the garden of eden.

Adam was in full possesion of grace having just been created by God. Then he sins by disobeying God. By your reasoning, Adam has not lost grace. It really is pointless then God sending us His only begotten Son.

Those who are in Christ, were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world. That presupposes Adam’s fall.

benedictus2:

2nd scenario. Johnny professes Christ as his Lord and Saviour.
But then because he is so sure of his salvation, he commits adultery, fornication, massacred a few people. And is unrepentant because he believes once saved, always saved. So he continues on his sinful life. Unremorseful to the end. Is he still saved?

A mere profession of faith, which is what you’ve presented, is not a guarantee of anything.

What distinguishes those who merely profess to be saved from those who truly saved, is that the professing person will not continue indefinitely in his false professed faith (Mt 13:20-22); the truly saved person will persevere to the end (Mt 24:13).

benedictus2:

I think your line of reasoning is used by those who want to say they are Christians but really wants the impunity to commit all sort of sin.

I know you’re wrong in what you think is my line of reasoning.

 

[Zooey]

Vivhlopet, I have read through this thread, and I have to ask you:

Do you know that there are millions of people in the world who have never even heard the Name of Jesus?

Do you realize that the only way they will ever hear it, is if people who know Jesus are willing to go and tell them??

And, if you *do *know those things, why in the name of goodness are you spending your time & energy preaching to the converted, when there is a world full of non-Christians out there, who would be glad to hear what you have to say?

I’m sorry, but this really drives me nuts. Every time the moon is full, or jupiter alines with mars, we get a whole buch of people here at CAF, who sound pretty much like you sound, and not one of them has any time to spend trying to reach folks who are wandering in spiritual darkness. They are all like you–hollering at those of us who have seen the Light of the world, and fallen in love with the Light of the world.

What a foolish waste. Really, this kind of thing is just sad.

Yes, I know; you don’t "get it’. I knew that before I was halfways down the first page of posts.
Actually, I had a pretty fair idea when I read the title of this thread…I just wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[VARC]

These days, what the RCC teaches concerning justification is somewhat ambiguous. The Vatican signed a Joint Declaration on Justification with the Lutherans 10 years ago (justifcation by faith alone) and many Roman catholics on this forum believe, encouraged by the CCC and Vatican II, that faith in Christ is not necessary ie. Ghandi (justification by works alone). This is a doctrine where there doesn’t seem to be much unity in the RCC.

 

[maurin]

These days, what the RCC teaches concerning justification is somewhat ambiguous. The Vatican signed a Joint Declaration on Justification with the Lutherans 10 years ago (justifcation by faith alone) and many Roman catholics on this forum believe, encouraged by the CCC and Vatican II, that faith in Christ is not necessary ie. Ghandi (justification by works alone). This is a doctrine where there doesn’t seem to be much unity in the RCC.

I believe you mean “by grace” and not by “faith alone.” However, I agree with you that since Vatican II the Church Christ founded is in disarray. We thank God for the reasonable voices to be found amongst the Traditionalists.

 

[VARC]

I believe you mean “by grace” and not by “faith alone.” QUOTE]

No. The Vatican agreed that the Lutheran understanding of justification by faith alone was legitimate.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I was raised a Southern Baptist, but I got saved and found Jesus, and immediately abandoned the mystery of iniquity with its traditions and precepts of men for the simplicity of the Gospel.

 

[Gamera]

Actually, I was saved in 1993, and I continued to attend a Catholic church for the next few years. No one told me to leave the CC. My leaving was a result of me reading the word of God and seeking to know him with my whole heart continually. The Holy Spirit told me to leave the RCC through truths contained in the Scripture; I then began to learned the differences between Catholicism and born again bible believers. I actually didn’t even know what the reformation was. I heard of Protestants but I didn’t know what that meant either. So don’t be sorry, Christ found me and he led me to a New Testament bible believing Baptist Church. Jesus said: if you love me you will keep my words" and that is something that Bible Believers have done since Christ founded his church.

When you say you were “saved” in 1993, what does that mean to you?

 

[Gamera]

The meaning of grace is that it’s undeserved favor. That favor begins with God giving it to a rebellious sinner who is not good enough to earn it; God doesn’t stop giving grace when the redeemed stumble.

Well, you say “stumble” but a mortal sin isn’t a “stumble.” A “stumble” is an accident. A mortal sin is an intentional act of walking away. When a person commits a mortal sin, he intentionally walks away from God.

The corollary to not being good enough to earn grace, is that you’ll never be bad enough to lose grace.

No, that isn’t true. God will not accept sinners into His kingdom.

As the psalmist says, “If you, Lord, judge us by our iniquities, who could stand?” That’s a rhetorical question, the expected answer to that question is “no one,” not even the redeemed.

Right. That’s why, any time we lose our grace by sinning, only Jesus’ forgiveness can restore it: we cannot earn it back with good works.

That’s why grace is grace; if you can lose your salvation, that’s not grace.

One has nothing to do with the other. Yes, grace is an undeserved gift. And yes, we can accept the gift, then later reject the gift, then later accept it again … that doesn’t mean it isn’t a gift.

So you’ll be in heaven, and will never permanently walk away from Christ?

I cannot see the future. I haven’t lost the ability to sin, if that’s what you’re asking.

 

[sandusky]

Gamera:

Well, you say “stumble” but a mortal sin isn’t a “stumble.” A “stumble” is an accident.

So accidental sin is OK with God?

Gamera:

A mortal sin is an intentional act of walking away. When a person commits a mortal sin, he intentionally walks away from God.

Mortal sin has only to do with walking away?

Gamera:

No, that isn’t true. God will not accept sinners into His kingdom.

That’s right; and in the NT, those who truly believe are called “saints,” and even saints sin, and only those called saints enter heaven.

Gamera:

Right. That’s why, any time we lose our grace by sinning, only Jesus’ forgiveness can restore it: we cannot earn it back with good works.

That’s amusing; when you need grace most, at the time of sinning, that’s when you God takes it away from you; how bizzare.

Gamera:

One has nothing to do with the other. Yes, grace is an undeserved gift. And yes, we can accept the gift, then later reject the gift, then later accept it again … that doesn’t mean it isn’t a gift.

That sounds more like a merry-go-round; better hope you die on the upside of grace, eh?

Gamera:

I cannot see the future. I haven’t lost the ability to sin, if that’s what you’re asking.

That’s not what I’m asking; I believe you said you’ve seen the light; if you think you can lose your salvation, IMO, you haven’t seen the light.

 

[Gamera]

So accidental sin is OK with God?

There is not such thing as “accidental sin,” nor did I say any sin was “okay with God.”

Mortal sin has only to do with walking away?

I don’t understand this question. Are you asking the definition of a mortal sin?

That’s right; and in the NT, those who truly believe are called “saints,” and even saints sin, and only those called saints enter heaven.

Saints can sin – they don’t lose their free will – but a saint who loses the state of grace stops being a saint and will not enter heaven unless he returns to God’s grace.

That’s amusing; when you need grace most, at the time of sinning, that’s when you God takes it away from you; how bizzare.

That’s like saying, “I stood on a rooftop and jumped off. Just when I needed that rooftop most, it wasn’t under my feet anymore. How bizarre.”

That sounds more like a merry-go-round; better hope you die on the upside of grace, eh?

Yup. Just like St. Paul hoped (1 Cor 9:27).

That’s not what I’m asking; I believe you said you’ve seen the light; if you think you can lose your salvation, IMO, you haven’t seen the light.

And the opinion of an internet stranger about the status of my soul should matter to me because … ?

 

[sandusky]

Gamera:

There is not such thing as “accidental sin,” nor did I say any sin was “okay with God.”

Are you saying then that a “stumble” is not a sin? How ‘bout a “shipwreck?” Is a “shipwreck” a mortal sin—a loss of salvation sin?

Gamera:

I don’t understand this question. Are you asking the definition of a mortal sin?

You spoke of mortal sin only in terms of “walking away.” Mortal sin is not limited to walking to away; correct?

Gamera:

Saints can sin – they don’t lose their free will – but a saint who loses the state of grace stops being a saint and will not enter heaven unless he returns to God’s grace.

IOW, they lose their lose salvation by bad works, in this case, by sin—that’s not salvation by grace.

Gamera:

That’s like saying, “I stood on a rooftop and jumped off. Just when I needed that rooftop most, it wasn’t under my feet anymore. How bizarre.”

No it’s not at all; you Catholics and your analogies; IMO, that’s what happens when you can’t deal with scripture.

Gamera:

Yup. Just like St. Paul hoped (1 Cor 9:27).

1 Cor 9 is about merry-go-rounds?

Gamera:

And the opinion of an internet stranger about the status of my soul should matter to me because … ?

You may be entertaining an angel, without knowing it, sent to bring the good news
(Heb 13:2).

 

[Gamera]

Are you saying then that a “stumble” is not a sin? How ‘bout a “shipwreck?” Is a “shipwreck” a mortal sin—a loss of salvation sin?

Well, a shipwreck can be either intentional or accidental, so that doesn’t help.

You non-Catholics and your analogies.

You spoke of mortal sin only in terms of “walking away.” Mortal sin is not limited to walking to away; correct?

Mortal sin is not limited to apostasy, correct. All mortal sin constitutes “walking away” from God because it is a voluntary choice to turn away from Him.

IOW, they lose their lose salvation by bad works, in this case, by sin—that’s not salvation by grace.

It is salvation by grace. It simply isn’t what you think salvation by grace is. Feel free to tell me what you believe, but please don’t tell me what I believe. I believe in salvation by grace. A person can lose grace by sinning but that person cannot then ‘earn’ forgiveness by good deeds – the forgiveness is still God’s free and undeserved gift.

No it’s not at all; you Catholics and your analogies; IMO, that’s what happens when you can’t deal with scripture.

I’ve built my life on God’s word so I’d say I’ve “dealt with Scripture” fairly well.

1 Cor 9 is about merry-go-rounds?

Ah, no, St. Paul wrote that he hoped he would not be disqualified, just as you pointed out that I hoped I would die in a state of grace.

You may be entertaining an angel, without knowing it, sent to bring the good news
(Heb 13:2).

 

[benedictus2]

Actually, I was saved in 1993, .

When you were saved in 1993.

Look deep into your heart and ask yourself, better yet ask the Lord: Had you died before this “saving” event, would Christ have sent you to Hell?

Now, I don’t know you from a bar of soap but I am presuming that prior to being “saved” you would have loved, been merciful, been kind, etc. And yet, you would have been consigned to eternal damnation because, alas, you were not “saved”.

If that is the kind of God Jesus is, maybe we should all become atheists.

 

[benedictus2]

Those who are in Christ, were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world. That presupposes Adam’s fall.

If who ever was chosen in Christ was determined before the foundation of the world **then there really is no point in being Christian now is there, since everything was already predetermined before we were even born. **

This sounds very much like a Muslim doctrine.
They also believe that there really is nothing we can do about salvation because who goes to hell or to heaven was already decided before birth. Very depressing thought. Very non Christian.

will not continue indefinitely

in his false professed faith (Mt 13:20-22); the truly saved person will persevere to the end (Mt 24:13).

And how does this “saved” person manifest his “perseverance” to the end? How do you tell one “truly saved” person from one that is “not really saved”?

 

[CSN]

I’m not talking about Pelagianism; what I said is that the salvation that can be lost by works, is a salvation that’s not by grace, but by works.

If you train every day to win the 100m sprint, it may give you a chance to become an Olympic champion. That said, however you also need the God-given genetics to win as well. You need the training, and the God-given gift.

On the other hand, even if you have the God-given genetics but you fail to train, you can be sure you will never win the 100m sprint. You fail to train, you lose for sure.

 

[Peter_J]

maurin;4236356:

I believe you mean “by grace” and not by “faith alone.”

No. The Vatican agreed that the Lutheran understanding of justification by faith alone was legitimate.

That may be true (it’s been a while since I read the JDDJ). But saying that “faith alone” is legitimate isn’t the same as saying we agree with it.

“Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works.”

 

[Thing]

[Cursing a fig tree - out of season - shoulda raised some eyebrows, but apparently not.]

It sure did…

2 Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine.

41 They say to him: He will bring those evil men to an evil end; and will let out his vineyard to other husbandmen, that shall render him the fruit in due season.

Perhaps I am out of season, I am bearing no fruit when He finds me, so He curses me and I die.

Afterwards…

…they came to Jerusalem…entered into the temple…And he taught, …

…Which when the chief priests and the scribes had heard, they sought how they might destroy him. For they feared him, because the whole multitude was in admiration at his doctrine. 19 And when evening was come, he went forth out of the city. 20 And when they passed by in the morning they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.

 

[sandusky]

Gamera:

Well, a shipwreck can be either intentional or accidental, so that doesn’t help.

You non-Catholics and your analogies.

”Stumble” and “shipwreck” are biblical terms, and “shipwreck” is what the Pope said concerning those who would dare to speak against the IC; don’t you know that?

Gamera:

Mortal sin is not limited to apostasy, correct. All mortal sin constitutes “walking away” from God because it is a voluntary choice to turn away from Him.

OK.

Gamera:

It is salvation by grace. It simply isn’t what you think salvation by grace is. Feel free to tell me what you believe, but please don’t tell me what I believe. I believe in salvation by grace. A person can lose grace by sinning but that person cannot then ‘earn’ forgiveness by good deeds – the forgiveness is still God’s free and undeserved gift.

I’m not telling you what you believe; what I’m telling you is that if one can lose salvation by bad works, or sin, that’s not salvation by grace, but works, in spite of what you believe.

Gamera:

I’ve built my life on God’s word so I’d say I’ve “dealt with Scripture” fairly well.

I see.

Gamera:

Ah, no, St. Paul wrote that he hoped he would not be disqualified, just as you pointed out that I hoped I would die in a state of grace.

That’s not what Paul said—he hoped he wouldn’t be disqualified—that’s not what he said.

 

[sandusky]

CSN:

If you train every day to win the 100m sprint, it may give you a chance to become an Olympic champion. That said, however you also need the God-given genetics to win as well. You need the training, and the God-given gift.

On the other hand, even if you have the God-given genetics but you fail to train, you can be sure you will never win the 100m sprint. You fail to train, you lose for sure.

The emphasis in salvation for you is works—that’s the ultimate determiner of your salvation—works?

 

[sandusky]

benedictus2:

If who ever was chosen in Christ was determined before the foundation of the world then there really is no point in being Christian now is there, since everything was already predetermined before we were even born.

This sounds very much like a Muslim doctrine.
They also believe that there really is nothing we can do about salvation because who goes to hell or to heaven was already decided before birth. Very depressing thought. Very non Christian.

Predestination is a biblical doctrine; it’s also a doctrine that you, as a Catholic, are required to believe de fide.

benedictus2:

And how does this “saved” person manifest his “perseverance” to the end? How do you tell one “truly saved” person from one that is “not really saved”?

He perseveres to the end.

benedictus2:

When you were saved in 1993.

Look deep into your heart and ask yourself, better yet ask the Lord: Had you died before this “saving” event, would Christ have sent you to Hell?

Now, I don’t know you from a bar of soap but I am presuming that prior to being “saved” you would have loved, been merciful, been kind, etc. And yet, you would have been consigned to eternal damnation because, alas, you were not “saved”.

If that is the kind of God Jesus is, maybe we should all become atheists.

Only “good people” are saved?