wpr:
Hello Kendy,
Forgive me if I missed this in any earlier post. They are hard to follow. Do you beleive in “once saved always saved”? That would clear up a bit for me.
Yet, equating good works as the “symptoms” of the “disease” called “faith” does not work for me. Symptoms are something that come naturally from the disease. We may part here, (it’s O.K.) but living a life in Christ’s calling does not come naturally. Paul reminds his converts constantly. This is also precisley the reason for James’ letter.
Rather, one has to be as Paul and live like an athlete… “I drive my body and train it, for fear that I myself should be disqaulified.” Paul’s pretty tough, but I think he makes his point. (more than one place as well). If you meant basically the same, then we may agree. I know it’s hard to make a point 100% clear.
If you do agree, why don’t you go to your RC Church, confess, and come back home? For God’s sake your Catholic! ( I’m just joking, (partially))
I think we are close to agreeing at least on justification. Although I must ask you what you mean about being found worthy. I hope we can agree that we are not worthy.
Anyway, the question is how binding is that justification. I do believe in once saved always saved, but I believe in the way a child believes a parent who says, if you get A’s on your report card, I will by you a new bike. I believe it not because I am in a position to impose anything on my father but because I trust that my dad would not lie to me. So, like I said earlier, the sticking point is what has God promised?
Secondly, what do we mean by faith. John 3:36 says, “Whoever believes in the son has eternal life; whoever disobeys the son will not see life, but must endure God’s wrath.” So, to believe is to obey, to have faith is to obey, to love Him is to obey is His commandments. One is born of the other.
As for Paul’s race. I think protestants often interpret that as Paul not working for his salvation since he already told us that our works were filthy rags, but rather having been redeem, he was striving for greater rewards in heaven. We can infer that Paul was confident about his salvation because when his life was threaten, he said, “to die is to be with Christ.” Paul knew where he was going. If you know where you are going, why would you strive for it?
Now, this is where you might say, is this not an invitation to sin? Well, this is where the 6th chapter of Romans rescues us. “Should we continue to sin so that grace may abound? By no means how can we who died in sin go on living in it? … We know that our old self was crucified so that sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” By the way, I skipped the stuff in between to save space. Please, read the whole passage.
That we are no longer enslaved to sin has serious practical implications. By the grace of God, my old nature has been crucified. It is because of this that I produce “good works.” Allow me to provide an example, for months after I became a believer, I continued to struggle with a serious sin. However, I didn’t enjoy it the way I used to before coming to Christ (it offended my new nature, but habits are sometimes hard to break). The Spirit, who is a great nag, kept convicted me. Eventually, I confessed it to God, talked to Him about how I found this difficult to avoid this but I knew it was wrong and I didn’t want to do it because I love Him. A while later, I realized that I hadn’t comitted this for a very long time even when I found myself in what used to be tempting situations. I also realize that I no longer wanted to do this. This was something that I had done for years sometimes obsessively.
Another thing to keep in mind is that God is no fool. He wouldn’t grant to eternal security to those who don’t truly love Him (which is what it means to have faith in Him). I wouldn’t want to continue sinning because I love Him. He has graciously granted me eternal security because I love Him. They are one in the same.
So, am I catholic-approved?
.
While justification was a major cause of contention, as far as I can tell there have been at least two agreements signed between proestants and catholics on this. There was the world wide agreement with the Lutheran Church, and the American agreement with leading evangelicals. So, I think this is not the source of contention that it once was, but I am not so sure that this good news has made it’s way through the ranks. When I read these agreement, I concluded that I am in agreement with the RCC position, but when I read some of the comments on this forum I am not so sure.
In addition, we are not out of woods yet. There is still the issue of authority, and other things. For example, I just read the the defense of indulgences on this site and I must say, I am not happy camper.
But like I said, I will pray for all of us,
Kendy
. I have to go tell my cafeteria catholics friends about you people. But just to make sure, I have read it again, and I am sorry but I am not seeing the problem that you are seeing. Particularly since I have never said, to sin like hell on your way to heaven. On the other hand, I fear that the concept of redemptive works contradicts Eph 2:9. I feel like the interpretation that works is the evidence and consequence of faith is a reading that prevents James from contradicting Paul. I am interested in knowing how you you interpret this passage, and the other passages like Galation 2:16. Or Chapters 5 to 8 in the book of Romans. I am not trying to give you homework. I really want to understand how you read this.
(J/K)
.