Is a church membership needed for salvation?

[zach_dunn]

It is my opinion that it matters not to which “church” one belongs to, or any church for that matter, as to salvation, only the condition of the heart and if one has sincerely accepted Christ as their Savior. What says you and do you have scripture supporting your answer? Bear

Is it necessary to be a part of Christ’s body to be saved?

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Hi Joey,

When someone responds to a post of mine, I try very hard to answer all questions asked and, to address each pertinent point made by that person. I expect the same courtesy in return, which you have not honored; therefore, I see not point in any further dialogue. I think it is obvious if we pick and choose only the parts of a post that are easy for us to respond to, it comes down to, you said, I said, scenario which, IMO, proves nothing. Hope you have a great day and may we meet one day in the place where we strive to get to.

Bear

Well…God bless and hopefully you will someday see that the Catholic Church IS the Church Christ established.

Take care. …

Just out of curiosity, what did I write in that passage that you found inconsiderate?

 

[PRmerger]

Why do you suppose that something that seems to be so important for so many was not mentioned by Jesus?

This is a curious paradigm, tevans. Is there some place in Scripture that states that the important things must be mentioned by Jesus?

Did Jesus say that “Eye has not seen, nor has ear heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man, what God has prepared for those who love Him”?

Do you think this is important, even if Jesus did not mention this?

Did Jesus say “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God;”

Did Jesus say that God created the world?
Did Jesus say that he was born of a virgin?

Do you think these things are important, even if Jesus did not mention them?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Arabic Catholic,

Excellent post!

I think you addressed the matter very well and look forward to you joining the Catholic Church.

Continue to be strong in your prayer life.

God bless

Christ started one Church to guide christians and he himself gave it the authority, being outside of tha Church of christ does not make any sense and it leads to confusion

The church hold tradition that goes back to the time of the apostles and the bible as we know it came from that tradition

the new testament talked about a church in the book of act that made a council to solve the problems of the time and peter practice his authority , its clear that the church was visible and it was there from the begining , and thank God for it because she(the church) brought to us the original christianity of the first century christians !!

if you study the church fathers you will see clearly that there was only one church , not 2 or three , and whenever a problem came to them they will solve it in a council

so yes its important to be part of the church and to understand the teachings of the church . and you will be AMAZED how biblical is the catholic church!! and i can say its more biblical then any other church

 

[tevans9129]

May I assume then that you have never read the short letter of James Chapter 2?

Part 1 of ?

Of course you may assume, however you would be wrong. So, may I ask you some questions about the chapter?

James 2:1 My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism.

Is this not the attitude of the CC, or any group for that matter that thinks because they belong to some worldly organization that it makes them privileged?

James 2:3 and you pay special attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, “You sit here in a good place,” and you say to the poor man, “You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,”

James 2:4 have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil motives?

Substitute those belonging to the CC for the one wearing “fine clothes” and those who are not members of the CC for the “poor man”, then how would you answer the question in v4?

James 2:5 Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?

“heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him”. Does it say anything about works or receiving sacraments or belonging to the CC?

James 2:6 But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court?

Was it not at one time the rich CC that oppressed certain groups and dragged people into court? Not my opinion, historical fact and I can provide quotes if you would like to see them.

James 2:7 Do they not blaspheme the fair name by which you have been called?

James 2:8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF,” you are doing well.

James 2:9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.

Is it not possible for v9 to apply to any group that shows partiality over any other group of Christians that do not belong to their organization?

James 2:14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

You may wish to note the phrase, “if someone says he has faith”, it does not say that someone has faith, and just saying that one has faith, faith in what? In addition, it asks the question, can that faith that someone just says that he has save him. No, if it is not faith from the heart, and if, the person does not believe in Christ.

Due to my lack of being able to articulate my thoughts clearly, I will offer this quote.

“The questions set up the hypothetical case of a person who “claims to have” genuine saving faith. Notice that James does not say that the person actually has faith. The question “Can such faith save him?” is so structured in the Greek text (using the negative particle mē interrogatively) that it expects a negative answer. The word “such” is the translation for the Greek article that appears before pistis, “faith.” James is asking, “This faith can’t save him, can it?” The article refers to the faith described in the preceding question—faith not accompanied by deeds. Faith without works cannot save; it takes faith that proves itself in the deeds it produces. James is not speaking of deeds performed to earn merit before God (as Paul uses the term in Rom 3:20). Genuine faith is a concomitant of regeneration and therefore affects the believer’s behavior. Faith that does not issue in regenerate actions is superficial and spurious.”

The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 12

If you, or anyone, wish to continue in a discussion of this post, I will gladly do so, if, we can agree to answer all questions asked, acknowledge all points made and, provide scriptural reference that says what we claim that it says, if requested. If not, then I respectfully decline to engage in further dialogue. I do not mean to be rude, only that it does not seem productive to me if we cannot provide supporting evidence for what we claim.

To be continued.

Bear

 

[tevans9129]

=tevans9129;7876896]

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Tevans,

Your presentaton seems to orbit around the issue of “Faith or Works” when what James is addressing is “Faith AND Works”

There must be both - which really puts those who claim 'Faith Alone" in a bind for we see that Christ demands works - as we see in these two references:

catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9909chap.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0303sbs.asp

And, here are references from the Early Church Fathers catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9210frs.asp

Please Note: this is an honest response to what you have posted.

It is not formatted as have demanded.

If you wish to engage in honest dialogue then I await your response. If you choose to ignore it, then so be it. My points are clear and logical: you must have both Faith and Works.

God bless

PJM;7882580:

Part 2 of ?

James 2:15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,

James 2:16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that?

James 2:17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

The question would be, if someone says that he or she has faith, but does not accept Jesus as their personal Savior, does that faith save them? I think not, if the faith is genuine and the person is saved, his actions and works will demonstrate his faith and salvation.

James 2:18 But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.”

Is v18 not differentiating between one only saying they have faith but does not validate it by their actions, from one’s authentic faith that is proven by their actions?

James 2:19 You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.

Many people, even church goers, believe their is a God, as do the demons, however, is that the same as one believing the gospel of Jesus Christ and accepting Him as their Savior?

James 2:20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?

Is this not emphasizing the fact that one’s faith is proven by their actions?

James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

“justified by works”, do you believe there is a difference in one being “justified” and one being “saved”? Did Abraham not prove his faith genuine by being obedient to God resulting in him being justified? Does God justify one before being saved?

James 2:22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;

Do you agree that the meaning of “faith” and “salvation” is different? Does v22 say that it was “faith” that was made perfect and not "salvation?

James 2:23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God.

What do you see in v23 that resulted in Abraham being righteous? How many verses in scripture can you quote that begins with, “works, baptism or church membership”, when salvation is the subject? Then, how many can you quote that begins with, “believe”?

James 2:24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Do you see anything in v24 saying that one is “saved” by works, or does it suggest that one is “justified” by works and faith?

James 2:25 In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

Was Rahab “saved” by her works, or, was she “justified” by her works?

James 2:26 For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

Do you disagree that v26 says nothing about works contributing to salvation but works serve as evidence of a genuine faith?

Since this response is quite long, it will be continued in a post to follow.

If you, or anyone, wish to continue in a discussion of this post, I will gladly do so, if, we can agree to answer all questions asked, acknowledge all points made and, provide scriptural reference that says what we claim that it says, if requested. If not, then I respectfully decline to engage in further dialogue. I do not mean to be rude, only that it does not seem productive to me if we cannot provide supporting evidence for what we claim.

To be continued.

Bear

 

[zach_dunn]

It is my opinion that it matters not to which “church” one belongs to, or any church for that matter, as to salvation, only the condition of the heart and if one has sincerely accepted Christ as their Savior. What says you and do you have scripture supporting your answer? Bear

Tevans,

Is it necessary to be a part of Christ’s Body to be saved?

 

[tevans9129]

=tevans9129;7876896]

 

[Monica4316]

It is my opinion that it matters not to which “church” one belongs to, or any church for that matter, as to salvation, only the condition of the heart and if one has sincerely accepted Christ as their Savior. What says you and do you have scripture supporting your answer? Bear

we don’t view being Catholic as “church membership”… it’s not membership in a church that contributes to salvation, but being in the Church, the Church that Christ started, His Body, the Catholic Church. Non Catholics are imperfectly united to it, but only Catholics are in perfect communion. It is in the Church that we receive the Sacraments… that is one of the reasons it is important. It’s not just about “membership”, it’s about receiving grace through the Sacraments.

God bless

 

[zach_dunn]

It is my opinion that it matters not to which “church” one belongs to, or any church for that matter, as to salvation, only the condition of the heart and if one has sincerely accepted Christ as their Savior. What says you and do you have scripture supporting your answer? Bear

For a third time tevans,

Is it necessary to be a part of Christ’s body to be saved?

 

[tevans9129]

=tevans9129;7876896]

Yes Indeed works are no foundation for boasting. Luke.17: 10 So you also, when you have done all that is commanded you, say, `We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty.’" BUT Bear, this is NOT saying that they are NOT required. But the polar-opposite. One cannot “lose” what one ONLY THINKS that they possess.

 

[tevans9129]

=tevans9129;7876896]

 

[campeador]

For a third time tevans,

Is it necessary to be a part of Christ’s body to be saved?

I doubt you get an answer from him my friend. I tried very hard to answer all the questions tevans asked and, to address each pertinent point made by him. I expected the same courtesy in return, which he has not honored.

 

[zach_dunn]

I doubt you get an answer from him my friend. I tried very hard to answer all the questions tevans asked and, to address each pertinent point made by him. I expected the same courtesy in return, which he has not honored.

How could we expect an answer when it’s so easy to pass over questions that are too difficult for him/her to answer?

And since I’m posting already, I suppose I’ll ask again:

Tevans, is it necessary to be a part of Christ’s body, as Paul describes it, to be saved?

 

[rinnie]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for your comments, however, since you did not answer the questions in my post, nor do I see any evidence proving your assertions, I have no further comments. If you wish any further discussion, I will be happy to do so, if, we both agree to answer any and all questions asked and, provide evidence supporting the answers if requested.

1. If one believed in and was a follower of Christ, was he not referred to as “Christian”?
2. I believe in and I follow Christ, at least to the best of my ability, therefore, am I not a Christian?
3. How many verses can you quote that one is referred to as a “Catholic”?
4. Why do you suppose that something that seems to be so important for so many was not mentioned by Jesus?
5. Possibly, but the argument is, why can you not prove some of the teachings of the CC with the same Bible as they compiled, can you answer that?

Bear

Tevans why don’t you go to the bible and find that answer? Its in there.

St Paul tell Timothy AS you continue in what you have LEARNED and have firmly believed knowing from WHOM and HOW.

St Paul tells him to continue in what he has learned for 2 reason.

1. He knows WHO he learned it from.
2. He is EDUCATED in the scriptures.

Now in 2 Thess 2:15 He says AGAIN STAND firm and HOLD to Traditions which you were TAUGHT by US by either WORD or MOUTH or LETTER.

Now the bible itself right there tells you is is not sufficient as a complete rule of faith.

Does the bible claim ALL IS WRITTEN? No it does not.

So now why is it the RCC has the WORD, the Oral Teachings, and the Letters. Why does not ONE Protestant Church have this if it is the TRUE Church?

The Church is not CATHOLIC on her ow n. It is Christ who through the Holy Spirit makes the Church ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC.

Catholic mean for ALL. It is Universal. The Church Christ set up is not for ONE person or ONE faith the Catholic Church is made for ALL people. Jews and Gentiles alike. All are called to the CC.

 

[rinnie]

PJM;7882580:

Since you chose to delete part of my quote, I do not have a clue as to what you are talking about in the above statement. However, I will quote some scripture as you have done.

Mark 2:7 “Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Acts 3:19 “Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord;

Acts 10:43 “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”

Acts 13:38 “Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you,

Acts 13:39 and through Him everyone who believes is freed from all things, from which you could not be freed through the Law of Moses.

Romans 11:27 “This is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.”

Colossians 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son,
Colossians 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood—

There are nine verses quoted here about forgiveness of sins and not one of them mentions baptism. Would you care to explain them?

Quote:

So, does this one obscure verse negate all the verses that are very clear on the subject? According to J.R. Mantey, the way the Greek is written in this verse, it is future perfect tense and as such, the power received by the disciples to forgive sin depends upon the previous forgiveness by God. A concept that I believe is validated by the verses that are quoted above. The Pharisees certainly seemed under the impression that God was the only one that could forgive sins.

Pat, I appreciate you sharing your views and your demeanor in doing so. As can be seen by the length of my responses to your post, I have spent a lot of time doing research and study. If you wish to continue with a discussion and will agree to the suggestions that I offered previously, I will gladly do so. If not, then this will probably be my lost post in response to any comments you make in the future to this thread.

God Bless and keep you.

Bear

---

Lets start with your first sentence. Do you not believe that Christ is Man and can forgive sins? Are you saying you agree with the Jews and Christ is not God and cannot forgive sins? If not why the scripture.

Is Jesus not Man? Yes or No. Next did Jesus as MAN given the power from his Father as he claimed to forgive sins?

Do you agree that Jesus had this power as MAN to do so? If so why do you reject this power that Jesus gave to his Apostles? He either had it to pass on or he did not.

 

[tevans9129]

How could we expect an answer when it’s so easy to pass over questions that are too difficult for him/her to answer?

And since I’m posting already, I suppose I’ll ask again:

Tevans, is it necessary to be a part of Christ’s body, as Paul describes it, to be saved?

Hi Zach,

As I said in post #132,

“It is not my intention to ignore anyone’s post on this subject; I am trying to respond in order of the post.”

There are many of you and only one of me. Unfortunately, I am sure that it is only a matter of time before I am banned from posting to this group so if you, or others, do not receive a response from me, that will be the reason, as it is my intention to respond to each post.

Bear

 

[guanophore]

It is unreasonable because to me it doesn't seem like a natural reading of the text.  It seems rather to be something artificial read into the text because of a pre-existing notion of what baptism is.

This is very true, Mack. The Jewish understanding of birth had nothing to do with water, and everything to do with blood.

John 1:12-13
12 But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Here are three references to natural birth - blood, will of the flesh, and will of man. None of them have to do with water!

Because, how would the original hearers of those words have understood them? I can’t imagine that they would have thought of born of water to mean the ordinary birth we all undergo

If they did, an offering from the uncleanness of blood would not be necessary, would it? The offering given in behalf of the mother after childbirth was for the uncleanness brought about by BLOOD. contact, not water!

Lev 12:1-5
12:1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the people of Israel, If a woman conceives, and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean seven days; as at the time of her menstruation, she shall be unclean. 3 And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. 4 Then she shall continue for thirty-three days in the blood of her purifying; she shall not touch any hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying are completed. 5 But if she bears a female child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her menstruation; and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying for sixty-six days.

All about the blood.

Do you have evidence that in those days that people referred to ordinary birth as being born of water? You first have to provide evidence of that in order to begin to prove your case. Being born of woman we hear of, but being born of water?

It is a modern American Fundamentalist innovation, less than 200 years old.

And besides, it is redundant. Because if being born of water means natural birth, it would be the same as saying, you have to be born first! You have to exist first! I mean like, duh, of course we have to exist first! We have to already have been born! So, what else is new?

It really does twist the sense of the passage. But some people will go to great lenghts to avoid the Catholic sense of things.

That is the problem with many non-Catholic interpretations…when they are probed into more deeply, they turn into absurdities, such as the above interpretation.

Or downright heresies. The preachers inventing them did not take the time to think through the implications of their interpretations.

The beliefs of the early church are also a strong indicator. The Pagans of the time believed the followers of Christ “drowned their children and eat their god”. That is pretty strong testimony about what they practiced!

 

[guanophore]

Hi Zach,

As I said in post #132,

“It is not my intention to ignore anyone’s post on this subject; I am trying to respond in order of the post.”

There are many of you and only one of me. Unfortunately, I am sure that it is only a matter of time before I am banned from posting to this group so if you, or others, do not receive a response from me, that will be the reason, as it is my intention to respond to each post.

Bear

Not necessarily, tevans. As a matter of fact, it is for people such as your self, who suffer from a truncated gospel, that CAF exists. People do not get banned for having anti-Catholic ideas, only for forcing them upon the faithful. As long as you follow the forum rules, you are welcome here. That goes for Catholics and “bible christians”.

I saw a number of your posts I would like to address but they are several days old, so I am going to do some catching up on the thread.