Loss of Rewards

[adamhovey1988]

Question: Why is this in Non-Catholic religions?

 

[fhansen]

But we aren’t talking about the reprobate, we are talking about the elect. The Gospel is good new for all who believe. It is not okay news or could be great news, it is the greatest news ever. That Christ died for me and offers me forgiveness of sins, a relationship with God, and eternal life is the greatest thing ever. And all are a free gift that I don’t deserve and don’t have to work to receive. I don’t have to convince God that I’m worthy, I don’t have to balance any scales of good over bad, it is not a scholarship to heaven that I might get if I make good enough on “the test”. I rest in Christ who is worthy, who did all good and none bad, and who sits at the right hand of God. It is His work of living a perfect life and being the perfect and forever sacrifice and overcoming death that allows any of us to be saved. He did the work and we get the benefits.

Ok, so no longer obligated to be personally righteous -only to believe, which is a sad and distorted theology indeed, sorry, bringing up shades of Is 5:20, and totally inconsistent with the rest of Scripture as well. And the same good news and love is absolutely withheld from others such that they don’t even have a choice, but to sin. Their unchosen sinfulness earns eternal death while the unchosen righteousness of the elect brings eternal life. And that, is a distorted gospel which also lays the direct cause of all evil including the most heinous variety directly into the hands of God. And His Church has never been willing to go there.

 

[BohemianBrother]

Every Catholic affirms both.

And every educated Protestant should as well.

What I mean is the argument about the order of things in salvation (the predestinarian starts with “All the elect are eventually justified and then sanctified and after death they enter Heaven, even if they stumble on the way, they eventually recover from sin and unto everlasting life,” while the free will-er would say something like “Anyone who accepts the call of God’s grace (or at least doesn’t reject it), and works in faith, and keeps being in Christ until their death is saved and thus among the elect.”)

 

[lanman87]

Ok, so no longer obligated to be personally righteous -only to believe, which is a sad and distorted theology indeed,

You totally ignored my second paragraph. Or the post above about the difference between Justification and Sanctification.

Personal righteousness is not an obligation for salvation, it is a result of salvation. Else Ephesians 2:8 is wrong and salvation(past, present, and future) is “by our own doing”.

Also Titus 3:5 would be wrong and we would be saved by works of righteousness instead of being saved according to his mercy.

 

[fhansen]

Personal righteousness is not an obligation for salvation, it is a result of salvation.

And that is where the distortion begins. The New Covenant is not about relieving man of his obligation to be righteous, as if he cannot possibly be who he was created to be. Rather the NC is about finally, in the “fullness of time”, providing the true means to do that very thing. “Apart from Me you can do nothing.” With Christ we realize the righteousness we were created to have and overcome the sin that leads to death. Or, we don’t enter heaven as Scripture make very clear.

The New Covenant is all about communion with God and the righteousness that that fellowship automatically results in. Justification and sanctification are inseparable; they’re part an parcel of the same workings of God with sanctification only being increased growth in the very justice or righteousness/virtues of faith, hope, and love that we’ve been given at the beginning of our new relationship with Him, as we invest our talents, the grace given, working out our salvation together with He who works in us. God wants mans will involved, for our own good; that’s an intrinsic part of man’s righteousness or justice. To put it another way, properly understood, love always involves choice.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Because this is a common objection tomour understanding of salvation by non Catholic Christians in the West.

 

[lanman87]

The New Covenant is not about relieving man of his obligation to be righteous,

The New Covenant is about Christ meeting that obligation for us and then giving us the Righteousness of God (not our own personal righteousness) that is received through faith (Romans 3:25). We have been justified by faith apart from the law. The law is what tells us what sin is and isn’t and is what shows us that we are sinners, be it the Mosaic law of the Jews or the natural law of the gentiles. Neither the Mosaic Law or the Natural Law have the power to save us. All they can do is show us how messed up we really are. (Romans 3:20) If the law had the power to save us then we wouldn’t need a Savior. We wouldn’t need Jesus, we would just have to keep the law and we would be righteous. (Gal 3:21)

Jesus didn’t come to give us the ability to save ourselves by giving us the power to keep the law and become righteous through keeping the law. He came to meet the demands of the law (Romans 8:3-4) and give us the righteousness of God, that comes by Faith. (Romans 3:22, 3:25, 1 Cor 1:30, 2 Cor 5:21, Phil 3:9, Heb 11;7, 2 Peter 1:1)

The reason that we need God’s righteousness instead of our own is because we are like Paul, we struggle with sin, and will continue to break the law (which shows us our sinfulness). And even breaking one of the laws is the same as breaking them all. (James 2:10). If we relied on our own personal righteousness then we would all ultimately fail. We may be able to be righteous for a short time but any sin we commit would cause us to fall short of the mark and cause us to break the entire law. But because our righteousness is not our own we are protected by the Righteousness of God, which never fails. Which brings us back to why There is no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

We don’t deny infused righteousness. We call it Sanctification, which is the progressive work of God in our lives to change us into His image.

Funny. I seem to remember you saying that it’s an “anti Gospel error.”

We separate the Act of Justification (which is an act of God), and Sanctification (which is the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit to transform us into the image of God).

Does Paul?

And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
1 Corinthians 6:11

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Jesus didn’t come to give us the ability to save ourselves by giving us the power to keep the law and become righteous through keeping the law

He didn’t give us an excuse to shirk either. He says only those who do the will of His Father will get inside Heaven.

We have been justified by faith apart from the law.

And do we make the Law void by faith? No, we uphold the Law. Why? Becuase Jesus doesn’t just fulfill the Law for us, He does it in us.

 

[lanman87]

Funny. I seem to remember you saying that it’s an “anti Gospel error.”

I’ll clarify, Infused righteousness as it pertains to Justification.

And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Both are speaking the past tense. Those who were washed were sancitified (ongoing) and justified(declared righteous)

 

[Throwawayaccount1]

I always thought it was like one gold bar, but man, this guy had so much and he did NOTHING.

• [18:24] A huge amount: literally, “ten thousand talents.” The talent was a unit of coinage of high but varying value depending on its metal (gold, silver, copper) and its place of origin. It is mentioned in the New Testament only here and in Mt 25:14–30.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

And even breaking one of the laws is the same as breaking them all. (James 2:10).

And we are to live cognizant of that fact. (James 2:12) If we do that, we fulfill the royal law, "Love others as you love yourself(James 2:9).

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Those who were washed were sancitified (ongoing) and justified(declared righteous)

You just said.

Both are speaking the past tense.

So how can sanctified be ongoing if it happens in the past? Paul is speaking of the identity we have in baptism.

 

[lanman87]

So how can sanctified be ongoing if it happens in the past?

Have you been sanctified in the past? Have I?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Have you been sanctified in the past? Have I?

What is baptism and what does it do?

 

[lanman87]

What is baptism and what does it do?

That’s a different rabbit trail.

 

[Throwawayaccount1]

Ted Bundy saw a priest before he died, is he in Heaven?

 

[lanman87]

Becuase Jesus doesn’t just fulfill the Law for us, He does it in us.

He fulfills the law for us in Justification (declaring us just) and in us by Sanctification (making those He declared Just into His image).

 

[lanman87]

What is baptism and what does it do?

I will say that Baptism was definitely part of my sanctification process.

 

[Throwawayaccount1]

What about confirmation tho? And what about priest’s holy orders?

Honestly justification is just baloney because you have a conscience. You know what’s up and what’s down. A kid with no set of beliefs is innocent and will not do half the stuff grown men with all kinds of beliefs do.

Balaam refused to speak what God did not speak and would not curse the Israelites, even though King Balak of Moab offered him money to do so (Numbers 22–24). But Balaam’s error and the source of his wickedness came from sabotaging the Israelites as they entered the Promised Land. According to Revelation (Revelation 2:14), Balaam told King Balak how to get the Israelites to commit sin by enticing them with sexual immorality and food sacrificed to idols. The Israelites fell into transgression due to these traps and God sent a deadly plague to them as a result (Numbers 31:16).

Now Balaam clearly knew God face to face. He saw an angel, visions, etc… He is not righteous on Faith alone.

Faith AND good works. Not either or.