Justification: Three Questions for Protestants

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fidelis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
sandusky said:
By believing—read the text—it’s all about believing, and how one comes to believe in Christ.
Click to expand...
Children believe in Santa Claus. Will he save them?

The whole point of the thread is Christ says we must DO a lot of things in order to be saved—keep the Commandments, refrain from sin, love one another, take up our crosses and follow him, etc.

What he does NOT say is, “Simply believe in me.”

Luke 6:46 - Why do you call me Lord, Lord but do not do what I tell you to do?

That verse doesn’t make the Bible Bingo list around here very often for some reason, but it takes a very selective reading of Scripture to cherrypick enough verses to claim we must do nothing at all except believe in Christ.

Even worse is Hallmark theology—we need do nothing but thank Christ.

Awfully hard to square that with the Christ of the Gospel calling us to repentance and holiness.
 
jpusateri said:
I’d like to push a little on John 6:54…What exactly are you doing to fulfill that command?
Click to expand...
Because He had not yet instituted the Lord’s Supper. In John 6, He is talking metaphorically. It’s an extension of what He told the woman at the well, in John 4, where He said He could give her living water, so that she would never thirst again. Just as manna fed the Israelites in the wilderness, so does Jesus’ body and blood “feed” us here below. The gospel message is this “food” that Jesus gives us, through the word.

By placing our faith in and making HIM Lord of our lives, we are fulfilling this command!
 
Teflon93 said:
Matthew?
Click to expand...
Are you looking for some protestants to teach you biblical truth?
Or is there some other point to this thread?
I already went through all four gospels and gave verses in each.
What more are you looking for?
 
jpusateri said:
Chuckle. I just explained it.

In the idiom of the day, eating flesh and drinking blood are repugnant. He either was trying to scare people away or meant what he said. It’s non-sensical to force the sense of the words to mean believing from the context.

He provided a way. Covenant sacrifices need to be eaten. Read your OT.

Hold it. They clearly understood the passage to be literal. If they thought it was metaphorical, they would not have been upset. They would have thought “Oh, he meant believe in him, same thing that he’s been saying all along, got it.”

They didn’t. They said “Eat his flesh! No way, I’m outta here.” It’s funny how the people who heard him (many of them) understood him worse than you do, and you weren’t even there!

He mentioned that they didn’t believe, but he’s explaining why they left at that point. They couldn’t believe that he meant what he was saying.

Let’s face it, if he DIDN’T mean what he said, he was talking crazy.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, when Christ referred to Peter as Satan in Matthew 16 he didn’t run away, the other apostles didn’t chain and beat him—they clearly understood Christ was speaking metaphorically.

That so many of the disciples bolted after Christ told them to eat of his flesh and his blood is a rather clear indication that they knew something out Biblical “fundamentalists” did not.

Isn’t it funny how the two places where these folks insist the Bible be read figuratively rather than literally are Christ promising to found the Church upon Peter and Christ telling us the bread and wine of which we must eat are his flesh and his blood?

What are the odds?
 
myfavoritmartin said:
Because He had not yet instituted the Lord’s Supper. In John 6, He is talking metaphorically. It’s an extension of what He told the woman at the well, in John 4, where He said He could give her living water, so that she would never thirst again. Just as manna fed the Israelites in the wilderness, so does Jesus’ body and blood “feed” us here below. The gospel message is this “food” that Jesus gives us, through the word.

By placing our faith in and making HIM Lord of our lives, we are fulfilling this command!
Click to expand...
Except he said it was the Eucharist.

So do we believe Christ or Simon?

I believe Christ.
 
misslollipops said:
Are you looking for some protestants to teach you biblical truth?
Or is there some other point to this thread?
I already went through all four gospels and gave verses in each.
What more are you looking for?
Click to expand...
I just found the omission of Matthew curious is all.

When dealing with our Protestant brethren, one must endeavor to ensure that they quote Scripture COMPLETELY on a topic. We don’t play Bible Bingo in these parts.
 
myfavoritmartin said:
By somes interpretation!
Click to expand...
I take comfort that I accept the “interpretation” held by those who knew Christ, the Apostles and was held by Christendom for its first 15 centuries. I tremble to think I could appoint myself a Magisterium of One and assert my view in preference of the Apostolic and Early Church Fathers.

I also tremble to think that I could place authority in a book and at the same time dismiss the entity/authority used by God to give us the Canon of the Bible and hold its writing inviolable to distortion from sinful man.
 
Teflon93 said:
Children believe in Santa Claus. Will he save them?

The whole point of the thread is Christ says we must DO a lot of things in order to be saved—keep the Commandments, refrain from sin, love one another, take up our crosses and follow him, etc.

What he does NOT say is, “Simply believe in me.”

Luke 6:46 - Why do you call me Lord, Lord but do not do what I tell you to do?

.
Click to expand...
**BUT TEF>>>>>
. Without faith it is impossible to please God **(Heb. 11:6)6 6And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who (A)comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

It is by faith that we live our lives, “The righteous shall live by faith,” (Hab. 2:4 4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.
; Rom. 1:1717 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

You are first justified by faith, then you do the works HE prepared in advance…See Eph 2:8-10
 
myfavoritmartin said:
By somes interpretation!
Click to expand...
Exactly. If you don’t accept the authority of Christ, handed down to Peter as the head of the Church to his Prime Minister, then you are your own “pope” and can interpret as you wish. It may not be the one Jesus meant. That is the danger.
 
40.png
jpusateri:
Chuckle. I just explained it.
Click to expand...
I didn’t see any explanation.
40.png
jpusateri:
In the idiom of the day, eating flesh and drinking blood are repugnant. He either was trying to scare people away or meant what he said. It’s non-sensical to force the sense of the words to mean believing from the context.
Click to expand...
The Hebraic idiom for eating and drinking would be synonymous with belief—read your O.T.

It’s irrational to force the words to mean the literal eating of Christ’s flesh, and the literal drinking of His blood—think about it.
40.png
jpusateri:
He provided a way. Covenant sacrifices need to be eaten. Read your OT.
Click to expand...
Chronologically, John 6 is at least a year prior to Jesus’ crucifixion. The requirement for covenant sacrifices was the shedding of blood; eating the sacrifice was ancillary, not necessary.
40.png
jpusateri:
Hold it. They clearly understood the passage to be literal. If they thought it was metaphorical, they would not have been upset. They would have thought “Oh, he meant believe in him, same thing that he’s been saying all along, got it.”

They didn’t. They said “Eat his flesh! No way, I’m outta here.” It’s funny how the people who heard him (many of them) understood him worse than you do, and you weren’t even there!
Click to expand...
Correct; they understood Him to say that must literally eat His flesh, and literally drink His blood, which is irrational; but Jesus explains the real reason for their leaving.
40.png
jpusateri:
He mentioned that they didn’t believe, but he’s explaining why they left at that point. They couldn’t believe that he meant what he was saying.
Click to expand...
He gives the specific reason for their leaving—read it.
 
myfavoritmartin said:
**BUT TEF>>>>>
. Without faith it is impossible to please God **(Heb. 11:6)6 6And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who (A)comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

It is by faith that we live our lives, “The righteous shall live by faith,” (Hab. 2:4 4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.
; Rom. 1:1717 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Click to expand...
Yes, Simon, you are correct that faith is a necessary component.

You yourself have stated time and again that we shall know true Christians by their fruit.

Since faith is invisible and internal, what is this fruit we shall know them by if not their deeds, as James so clearly puts it?

Indeed, does Christ not judge us by our deeds?
 
myfavoritmartin said:
**BUT TEF>>>>>
. Without faith it is impossible to please God **(Heb. 11:6)6 6And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who (A)comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

It is by faith that we live our lives, “The righteous shall live by faith,” (Hab. 2:4 4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.
; Rom. 1:1717 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Click to expand...
I think we all agree (please speak up otherwise) that faith is required. It’s just not sufficient. Once you believe, then you must DO. Faith without works is dead.
 
jpusateri said:
I think we all agree (please speak up otherwise) that faith is required. It’s just not sufficient. Once you believe, then you must DO. Faith without works is dead.
Click to expand...
Only to those whom believe justification involves an internal process in which a believer is transformed and “made” more and more righteous. And view grace as it is a spiritual power
poured or “infused” into the soul that enables one to love God
and merit salvation.

When you view that faith’s role in justification as, exclusively to receive Christ’s benefits given to sinners by God in His grace.
And justification as God’s undeserved favor, it takes on a whole different view! One that fits properly with all scripture!
 
Teflon93 said:
I just found the omission of Matthew curious is all.

When dealing with our Protestant brethren, one must endeavor to ensure that they quote Scripture COMPLETELY on a topic. We don’t play Bible Bingo in these parts.
Click to expand...
See post 100.
You see I am not going to some apologetics site and copying and pasting I am actually OPENING my bible and finding the verses.
Sure by this method I will make some mistakes and there will be ommisions.
But It is pretty clear who reads their bible and who doesn’t
 
sandusky said:
I didn’t see any explanation.
Click to expand...
Sigh.
The Hebraic idiom for eating and drinking would be synonymous with belief—read your O.T.
Click to expand...
That’s news to me. Teach me. Where precisely?
It’s irrational to force the words to mean the literal eating of Christ’s flesh, and the literal drinking of His blood—think about it.
Click to expand...
It makes sense to me. I do it all the time.
Chronologically, John 6 is at least a year prior to Jesus’ crucifixion. The requirement for covenant sacrifices was the shedding of blood; eating the sacrifice was ancillary, not necessary.
Click to expand...
Really? News to me again. Any support to that view? The passover sacrifice wasn’t complete until they ate the lamb.
Correct; they understood Him to say that must literally eat His flesh, and literally drink His blood, which is irrational; but Jesus explains the real reason for their leaving.
He gives the specific reason for their leaving—read it.
Click to expand...
Yes, they didn’t believe they had to eat his flesh and drink his blood. It follows immediately afterward. It’s obvious.
 
misslollipops said:
See post 100.
You see I am not going to some apologetics site and copying and pasting I am actually OPENING my bible and finding the verses.
Sure by this method I will make some mistakes and there will be ommisions.
But It is pretty clear who reads their bible and who doesn’t
Click to expand...
My first reaction to this statement was is this person struggling with self-righteous pride and a sense of superiority? But then, knowing that I should give the benefit of doubt to another, I decided to ask a question.

It isn’t clear to me who doesn’t read their Bible. Will you please illuminate me?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top