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

[Robert_in_SD]

Read the entire verse, from front to back and not from back to front; pay particular attention to the words He also, noting the linking of the preceding action to the subsequent action—they are inextricable.

Read it… again. It does not support your believe that you personally can know with absolute assurance of your own personal salvation. All it establishes is that God knows. Sorry, no dice.

sandusky:

The writer writes to all as though they were believers, he exhorts them all as though they were all going to forsake Christ and return Judaism—what would you expect him to do?

But do you not see that problem. If they all have already been sanctified, and suffered through persecutions, etc. as the author describes, then they are “saved” and there is no need to exhort. I’ve heard protestant pastors talk about exhorting their “saved” congregations to live moral lives, but they are careful to state that it is not tied to their salvation… except perhaps a person who is so far off track in their personal life that… yep, you guessed it… they should DOUBT their own salvation. It just makes no sense at all, and does not comport with the passages I’ve already cited.

sandusky:

Do you believe that everyone in the hearing of the reading of the letter was committing the sin, or on the verge of committing the sin being addressed by the writer?

No. My point is that they could, and thereby they could cut themselves off from the grace of God for salvation.

sandusky:

Thank you Robert, in spite of your moral assurance he exhorts you to right living, even though I’m certain that you are living an exemplary life and exhibit exemplary character, and partake of all of the sacraments, and never miss a day of obligation, but his exhortation is not directed to you only—there are others in your church, perhaps those who sat next to you last Sunday, who are not leading such a life, but are teetering on the edge because they are not truly believers, or maybe there are some who attend mass who are not Catholic, they’ve neither repented nor confessed Christ—exhortation to Christian living is proper—even in the Vatican.

Of course exhortation to right christian living is proper, especially in the Vatican. But the exhortation is CLEARLY tied to a warning that those who are in right relationship with Christ could lose that status by failing to endure. Why do you NOT see that? You must say to yourself such people who do not endure were “never justified.”

sandusky:

You continue to assume that all to whom the letter is written, and all in the hearing of the letter are in fact saved.

That is NOT my assumption. I’m saying that if YOU assume that once a person is “saved” they will remain “saved” then there is no need to exhort them to endure the trials and persecutions, because: (1) the “saved” will necessarily endure; while (2) the “never-saved” will necessarily never endure. I’m not assuming all are saved. I"m assuming all are professing Christians who were baptised - some of whom are in right relationship with God and others of whom are outside of that right relationship because of their serious and unrepentent sins.

sandusky:

It’s determined in eternity.

Regarding predestination, one’s final destination is known from eternity. That’s a different issue. According to you one’s personal salvation is known with assurance by the “saved” person at the moment one gives their life over to Jesus. That’s just not in the text of scripture. It is a dangerous presumption.

Peace,
-Robert

 

[sandusky]

Robert in SD:

Read it… again. It does not support your believe that you personally can know with absolute assurance of your own personal salvation. All it establishes is that God knows. Sorry, no dice.

Again, assurance is not necessary to salvation, but it’s nice to have it.
Robert in SD:

But do you not see that problem. If they all have already been sanctified, and suffered through persecutions, etc. as the author describes, then they are “saved” and there is no need to exhort. I’ve heard protestant pastors talk about exhorting their “saved” congregations to live moral lives, but they are careful to state that it is not tied to their salvation… except perhaps a person who is so far off track in their personal life that… yep, you guessed it… they should DOUBT their own salvation. It just makes no sense at all, and does not comport with the passages I’ve already cited.

I see no problem with hard words and exhortation:**1 Corinthians 15:1-2

1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand,

2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.**The grammar doesn’t state that the “vain” belief became “in vain,” but that if it was “in vain,” it was so from the point of its origin.

The whole chapter deals with the resurrection, a subject which they knew, and Paul’s qualifying statement, unless you believed in vain, recognizes and calls to their attention that some probably have a non-saving faith. They heard and believed the gospel, as do demons, but they had no love for Christ. The truly saved have a love for Christ, and they hold fast to the gospel, and they endure to the end (cf Lk 8:15; Jn 8:31; 2 Cor 13:5; 1 Jn 2:24; 2 Jn 9).
Robert in SD:

No. My point is that they could, and thereby they could cut themselves off from the grace of God for salvation.

It’s God who initiates salvation, and God who finishes salvation (cf Php 1:6; Heb 12:1; etc.).
Robert in SD:

Of course exhortation to right christian living is proper, especially in the Vatican. But the exhortation is CLEARLY tied to a warning that those who are in right relationship with Christ could lose that status by failing to endure.

Why do you NOT see that? You must say to yourself such people who do not endure were "never justified."Those against whom judgment will come are referred to in the passage as hupenantios—adversaries, opposed to the Gospel (v27). That doesn’t sound like a “right relationship” to me, but that they ”believed in vain,” from the beginning (cf Heb 3:6, 14).
Robert in SD:

That is NOT my assumption. I’m saying that if YOU assume that once a person is “saved” they will remain “saved” then there is no need to exhort them to endure the trials and persecutions, because: (1) the “saved” will necessarily endure; while (2) the “never-saved” will necessarily never endure. I’m not assuming all are saved. I"m assuming all are professing Christians who were baptised - some of whom are in right relationship with God and others of whom are outside of that right relationship because of their serious and unrepentent sins.

I’ve been over this, Robert.
Robert in SD:

Regarding predestination, one’s final destination is known from eternity. That’s a different issue. According to you one’s personal salvation is known with assurance by the “saved” person at the moment one gives their life over to Jesus. That’s just not in the text of scripture. It is a dangerous presumption.

What I find presumptuous is a leadership who teaches that’s it’s presumptuous to believe a writer of Scripture when he states that the purpose for his writing Scripture is so that one may know he has eternal life.

 

[jmcrae]

Again, assurance is not necessary to salvation, but it’s nice to have it.

I see no problem with hard words and exhortation:1 Corinthians 15:1-2

1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand,

2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.The grammar doesn’t state that the “vain” belief became “in vain,” but that if it was “in vain,” it was so from the point of its origin.

The whole chapter deals with the resurrection, a subject which they knew, and Paul’s qualifying statement, unless you believed in vain, recognizes and calls to their attention that some probably have a non-saving faith. They heard and believed the gospel, as do demons, but they had no love for Christ. The truly saved have a love for Christ, and they hold fast to the gospel, and they endure to the end (cf Lk 8:15; Jn 8:31; 2 Cor 13:5; 1 Jn 2:24; 2 Jn 9).

It’s God who initiates salvation, and God who finishes salvation (cf Php 1:6; Heb 12:1; etc.).

Those against whom judgment will come are referred to in the passage as hupenantios—adversaries, opposed to the Gospel (v27). That doesn’t sound like a “right relationship” to me, but that they ”believed in vain,” from the beginning (cf Heb 3:6, 14).

I’ve been over this, Robert.

What I find presumptuous is a leadership who teaches that’s it’s presumptuous to believe a writer of Scripture when he states that the purpose for his writing Scripture is so that one may know he has eternal life.

You can know, if you have it, that you have it, and also when and where you don’t have it, and need to get it back - unlike the poor OSASer who doesn’t find out until the end of his life that he was always a false professor - I would say, the Catholic way gives far more assurance than a system where you can think you have salvation and you can go ahead and live your life as you please because nothing can take it away from you, not even your own sins - but really, it turns out that you don’t have salvation at all.

 

[wina]

Sandusky, could you please answer post #165 by Benedictus2?, I’m still waiting for your opinions about that!

 

[Gamera]

You can know, if you have it, that you have it, and also when and where you don’t have it, and need to get it back - unlike the poor OSASer who doesn’t find out until the end of his life that he was always a false professor - I would say, the Catholic way gives far more assurance than a system where you can think you have salvation and you can go ahead and live your life as you please because nothing can take it away from you, not even your own sins - but really, it turns out that you don’t have salvation at all.

We also have the advantage of actually hearing the priest’s words, “I absolve you …” That is objective assurance, not just a feeling. Such a wave of peace comes over me when I hear those words because I have the Bible’s assurance that they are true (John 20:22-23). I don’t have to rely on my own subjective emotions to tell me whether I’m “saved,” which is good because, “The heart is deceitful above all things …” Jer. 17:9.

 

[sandusky]

You can know, if you have it, that you have it, and also when and where you don’t have it, and need to get it back - unlike the poor OSASer who doesn’t find out until the end of his life that he was always a false professor - I would say, the Catholic way gives far more assurance than a system where you can think you have salvation and you can go ahead and live your life as you please because nothing can take it away from you, not even your own sins - but really, it turns out that you don’t have salvation at all.

I would expect you to take no other position, Judith.

 

[sandusky]

Sandusky, could you please answer post #165 by Benedictus2?, I’m still waiting for your opinions about that!

Do you have a specific question?

 

[sandusky]

We also have the advantage of actually hearing the priest’s words, “I absolve you …” That is objective assurance, not just a feeling. Such a wave of peace comes over me when I hear those words because I have the Bible’s assurance that they are true (John 20:22-23). I don’t have to rely on my own subjective emotions to tell me whether I’m “saved,” which is good because, “The heart is deceitful above all things …” Jer. 17:9.

In Christ I have the complete forgiveness of sins, and you don’t.

In Christ I have a permanent right standing with God, and you don’t.

In Christ I have the assurance of eternal life based upon His promises and power, and you don’t.

I have the fullness of Truth.

 

[benedictus2]

It’s either grace, or works.

Point #1
The original issue between Protestants and Catholics was not about “grace” and “works” but “faith” as opposed to works.

That is why the two pillars of Protestantism is Sola Fide (Faith Alone) and Sola Scriptura (Scripture/Bible Alone).

This is why Luther ALTERED his version of the Bible and inserted the word ALONE where it was not there.

Luther famously said that he can commit adultery six times and it will not alter his salvation at all.

The Catholic Church and the Bible teaches that both are necessary (read James if your version of the Bible still includes this book)
Luther tried to get rid of this book and called it the Epistle of straw.

Point #2

** Under grace, one doesn’t lose salvation on the basis of bad works, or sin; that loss of salvation can only occur in salvation by works"**

It is true, you cannot lose salvation “under grace”.

However, by your sin you can “lose grace” which is a prerequisite for salvation. This is why when Adam and Eve sinned, they lost sanctifiying grace". Get the the difference?
And since without grace you cannot be saved, therefore it follows that by sinning, you lose salvation.

It’s like showers. God says you need to be wet to get into heaven so he sends down buckets full of rain. But if you stubbornly decide to stay indoors, there not much chance of you getting drenched. But then again, God could send storms to blow away your roof just so you can get wet. He has done this to Paul, so why not others.

But that is a major miracle.The ordinary way would be to step out of your door.

Also, nowhere in the Bible did Christ say to His Disciples. Here, write what I am saying for this is how I will deal with you when I have returned to my Father.

Rather he says: You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church (singular not churches) and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.

**But Christ did not say, and I will not let Satan tempt you to disobedience **so we have these sinners (me for one ) in the Catholic Church. Is everyone in your church squeaky clean? If so that is unfortunate because Christ came for the sinner.

From day one the Evil One has been unleashing his evil to take Christ’s Bride away from Him. ** He only promised that Satan will not prevail.**

In the early years of the Catholic Church, heresies arose which the Church firmly opposed and this is where formulations of doctrine started.

The devil must have found out that trying to convince people something that is so blatantly a lie was not working because it is so obviously black people were just not buying it enough.

So he tried shades of grey and voila, people bought it en masse.
And so the fragmentation of protestantism was born. So they all still believed in Jesus ( or part of what He taught) but they no longer had the Sacraments: the funnels of grace.

 

[benedictus2]

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

Please cite passages in the Bible and Catholic Doctrine which affirms predestination.

He perseveres to the end.

How? What does he perserverse in. For example, when you say that a track and field athlete perseveres to the end, he runs no matter what. So in case of being saved, how does the “saved” show their “perseverance”. Is there a physical manifestation to this?

Only “good people” are saved?

Aah, but you know I did not mean that?

My question was: If you had died, prior to being “saved” in 1993 would God have consigned you to hell, even though you may have loved other people, been merciful and kind?

How would have God dealt with you under those circumstances because by golly so many people die with being “saved” as per your definition of “saved”.

Simple question. Just need a simple answer.

And no, I do not believe only “good” people are saved. Christ came for the sinner. That is all of us.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

It just occured to me that I have never regreted my conversion. When I was saved, no one told me that I have to leave the Catholic religion, I simply believed that Jesus Christ paid for my sins with his blood and I called upon him to save me: just like the Philipian jailer in Acts 16:31. He asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved…” He did, and he was. To the saved believer, the thought of someone trying to administer God’s grace through some ritual is the highest form of idolatry there is. Jesus said, “it is finished”, not ‘it’s begun’.

I just hope that people will see that God’s grace is through faith in Christ and not in some man made rituals. May the Lord truly bless every one who is seeking to know him in truth.

So for the first 19 years of your life when you recited the creeds… What did you think you were doing?

When you prayed the prayers of the Mass, what did you think you were doing?

When you prayed the Our Father, why were you doing it?

 

[wina]

Do you have a specific question?

It’s post #165

Sandusky, what does the following mean then?

Matthew Charpter 25
**"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, **
**32 **
and all the nations 15 will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
**33 **
**He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. **
**34 **
**Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. **
**35 **
**For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, **
**36 **
**naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’ **
**37 **
Then the righteous 16 will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
**38 **
**When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? **
**39 **
**When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ **
**40 **
**And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ **
41 **
17 Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. **
**42 **
**For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, **
**43 **
**a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ **
**44 **
18**46 **
**And these will go off to eternal *Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ ***
***45 ***
***He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ ***
punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

While we do not merit our salvation, grace is what makes us do the above, and live the beautitudes.

For Catholics, good works is doing to Christ through service to others.

That is why the Catholic Church has the fullness of faith.

Sandusky, what do you think, by bad works(sins) can someone lose grace or can not? based on these verses of the gospel, please explain it

 

[Gamera]

In Christ I have the complete forgiveness of sins, and you don’t.

Whoa. And by what authority does an internet stranger claim to know the status of my soul?

In Christ I have a permanent right standing with God, and you don’t.

No, you don’t. You may feel you do, but again, “The heart is deceitful above all else …”

Besides, according to you everyone in the state of grace is assured salvation. How do you know that I’m not in the state of grace right now – and therefore, according to your theology, assured of salvation? Hmmm?

In Christ I have the assurance of eternal life based upon His promises and power, and you don’t.

That isn’t what the Bible says. That’s your own fanciful speculation. St. Paul didn’t have assurance of salvation.

I have the fullness of Truth.

So the first few centuries of Christians must not have had the fullness of truth, since they didn’t believe what you believe. When was the fullness of truth “rediscovered?”

 

[Gamera]

Please cite passages in the Bible and Catholic Doctrine which affirms predestination.

He’s right, Catholics do believe in presdestination, we just don’t believe in the kind of predestination held to by Calvinists. The Catholic view is that God is timeless – He sees all events throughout history all at once – and takes each person’s free will into account when predestining them for salvation. That isn’t what some of our non-Catholic friends mean by predestination.

 

[cazayoux]

Is vichlopet still around?
I was hoping for an answer to the questions I put to him/her.

Originally Posted by **vichlopet **
So yes good works will follow salvation. Someone who says they are saved and lives like hell is probably going there.

And yes there is something “if you don’t DO” that will keep you from heaven. If you don’t repent and get born again you won’t go to heaven. If you don’t turn from your own good works and trust the finished work of Christ you won’t get to heaven.

There is more that must be DONE, though, at least according to the bible.
While we are justified by Christ alone, we are expected to follow this with what we are told to DO. God has set aside work for us to DO. If we do them, we keep the salvation that was freely given us. If we do not do them, we might lose that salvation (as Paul taught).

Again, you can’t just pick one verse to define your theology, you need to use the entire bible.

Let’s see what the bible says.

As a Catholic, I believe what the Bible says in terms of what one must do in order to get to Heaven …
Have faith (Rom 3:28, John 3:16, 1 John 4:15)
forgive the sins of others (Matt 6:14-15)
care for one’s family (1 Tim 5:8)
feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick and imprisoned (Matt 25:31-46)
keep the Commandments (Matt 19:17 and 1 John 2:3-4)
love my brother (1 John 2:10)
deny ourselves and pick up our cross daily (Luke 9:23)
do the will of the Father (Matt 7:21)
eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man (John 6:51-58)
give a return for the talents the Master has given us (Matt 25:14-30)
be baptized (John 3:3-5, 1 Ptr 3:20-21)
confess our sins (1 John 1:9)…
all by the grace of God.

While ‘accepting Jesus into your heart’ is absolutely necessary, it is not the only thing the bible says is necessary.

Would you agree that if you repent (and get born again), but do not ‘eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man’ then you have no life in you?

You see works as a result of the faith as if it isn’t something we have to choose to do.
Do you see that faith without works is (a) not real faith or (b) dead faith?

michel

 

[moondweller]

Is vichlopet still around?
I was hoping for an answer to the questions I put to him/her.
There is more that must be DONE, though, at least according to the bible.

Not FOR salvation. Not according to the Bible.

While we are justified by Christ alone,

Man is justified by God Himself through FAITH alone; justification being gifted through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus - the crossRom 3:23-24 “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;”

Rom 3:27-30 "Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Or is God {the God} of Jews only? Is He not {the God} of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one.Bottom line, the Apostolic teaching regarding justification is that it’s gifted from God through faith alone based on the work of redemption accomplished by Christ alone. Catholicism (the system) denies this and adds works.

we are expected to follow this with what we are told to DO.

See what I mean?

God has set aside work for us to DO. If we do them, we keep the salvation that was freely given us. If we do not do them, we might lose that salvation (as Paul taught).

If there’s conditions attached then it’s not really “freely” given, is it? You present a contradictory statement.

Again, you can’t just pick one verse to define your theology, you need to use the entire bible.

The gospel of grace based on the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross is not in the “entire” Bible.Eph 3:1-5 “For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles-- if indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace which was given to me for you; that by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit;”…says Paul.

And according to Paul salvation/justification is gifted from God through faith alone, based completely on the work of redemption by Christ alone. The addition of works to be completed by you is a “different gospel,” according to the teachings of Paul and the mystery of Christ which was was divinely revealed to him.

 

[sandusky]

benedictus2:

The original issue between Protestants and Catholics was not about “grace” and “works” but “faith” as opposed to works.

Correct.

benedictus2:

This is why Luther ALTERED his version of the Bible and inserted the word ALONE where it was not there.

And Luther explained why, and that others in the church before him had done the same thing.

benedictus2:

Luther famously said that he can commit adultery six times and it will not alter his salvation at all.

Of course he did; now click here, read and hopefully learn something.

benedictus2:

Luther tried to get rid of this book and called it the Epistle of straw.

And he didn’t get rid of the book.

benedictus2:

It is true, you cannot lose salvation “under grace”.

However, by your sin you can “lose grace” which is a prerequisite for salvation. This is why when Adam and Eve sinned, they lost sanctifiying grace". Get the the difference?

And since without grace you cannot be saved, therefore it follows that by sinning, you lose salvation.

I understand the Catholic position.

benedictus2:

Also, nowhere in the Bible did Christ say to His Disciples. Here, write what I am saying for this is how I will deal with you when I have returned to my Father.

How do you know he didn’t? Not everything Jesus did was recorded in scripture (Jn 21:25), but what is important is that the apostles did write scripture, and no one writes scripture on their own, but only as the Spirit moves them (2 Pet 1:20ff), so Jesus did move them to write the scripture.

 

[sandusky]

wina:

Sandusky, what do you think, by bad works(sins) can someone lose grace or can not? based on these verses of the gospel, please explain it

Did David lose grace when he committed adultery with Bathsheba, and in deceit tried to cover it up, and when his deceit failed, he murdered Uriah—did David lose grace because of that?

(Why didn’t David lose grace?)

 

[jmcrae]

Did David lose grace when he committed adultery with Bathsheba, and in deceit tried to cover it up, and when his deceit failed, he murdered Uriah—did David lose grace because of that?

Yes, he did.

It was restored to him when he made his Confession to Nathan the Prophet, and Nathan the Prophet, speaking alter Christus, showed him the penance that he would suffer in atonement for his sin (the death of his child).

 

[sandusky]

Gamera:

Whoa. And by what authority does an internet stranger claim to know the status of my soul?

By the contrast between the soteriology you articulate, and that articulated by the apostles.

Your church teaches that you are forgiven only those sins committed prior to baptism. After baptism, you again mount the horse on the merry-go-round and remain stuck in the nighttime of the accumulation of sin-debt, and the need for further forgiveness.

That’s not what the scripture teaches.

God teaches that ***He has rescued His people by the sacrifice of His Son, and that He has canceled the sin-debt against them:*****Colossians 1:13-14

13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son,

14 in whom we have redemption, the [complete] forgiveness of sins.

Colossians 2:13-14

13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,

14 having canceled out the certificate of [ALL] debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.**

Gamera:

No, you don’t.

Having been justified by faith, I now have peace with God through Christ (Rom 5:1ff).

Gamera:

Besides, according to you everyone in the state of grace is assured salvation. How do you know that I’m not in the state of grace right now – and therefore, according to your theology, assured of salvation? Hmmm?

Because you don’t believe what I’m telling you—faith in the biblical gospel is essential.

Gamera:

That isn’t what the Bible says. That’s your own fanciful speculation. St. Paul didn’t have assurance of salvation.

You really have no way of knowing what the bible says as you are bound by your leadership to interpret scripture in light of what they tell you it says—the “deposit of faith.”

Gamera:

So the first few centuries of Christians must not have had the fullness of truth, since they didn’t believe what you believe. When was the fullness of truth “rediscovered?”

The fullness of truth has always been available in God’s revealed word.