P
pismopal
Guest
Tell your Baptist friends that we get a huge number of our converts from their denomI’ve had Baptist friends who wonder if I’m “saved” or not.
Catholics don’t get “saved”, we get confirmed
Tell your Baptist friends that we get a huge number of our converts from their denomI’ve had Baptist friends who wonder if I’m “saved” or not.
Catholics don’t get “saved”, we get confirmed
Not interrupt here, but Ive got a question about Judas. Didn’t Jesus pray before choosing the Apostles and Judas chose to be lost? That would mean to me he wasn’t evil to start with right?True, but I always thought Judas was the one about which Christ said it would be better if he had never been born:
Matt 26:23-25
23 He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me. 24 The Son of man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” 25 Judas, who betrayed him, said, “Is it I, Master?” He said to him, “You have said so.”
It makes Judas sound like one of the “vessels of wrath” that are written about. Just because he was sent on missionary journeys and did healings does not mean he was ever saved, either. Jesus may have been speaking of him when He said “I never knew you”.
If it is nothing but a mere declaration of righteousness, as opposed to a real righteousness, then how can you say one truly becomes holy? Does there not have to be real change? Your imputed righteousness position seems rather weak and unsupportable to me.You are correct and it is by Christ’s imputed righteousness and grace that we can.
INFUSED grace is a term often used by Catholic theologians to describe in metaphorical terms how God “pours” grace into our souls or, to put it another way, “fills” us with his grace. The word “infused” denotes the idea of something being “poured into” and is seen most commonly in the Latin formula gratia infusia. This language is symbolic, of course, but it is certainly biblical. Some Protestant critics of the Catholic Church criticize the concept of infused grace as being “unbiblical,” but as the following verses show, the concept is completely biblical.
“You are the fairest of the sons of men; grace is poured upon your lips; therefore God has blessed you for ever” (Psalm 45:2).
“For the palace will be forsaken . . . until the Spirit is poured upon us from on high, and the wilderness becomes a fruitful field, and the fruitful field is deemed a forest” (Isaiah 32:14-15).
“And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; yea, and on my menservants and my maidservants in those days I will pour out my Spirit; and they shall prophesy” (Acts 2:17-18).
“And Stephen, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people” (Acts 6:8).
“And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God with boldness” (Acts 4:31).
“And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles” (Acts 10:45).
“When he came and saw the grace of God, he was glad; and he exhorted them all to remain faithful to the Lord with steadfast purpose; for he was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith” (Acts 11:23-24).
“And hope does not disappoint us, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us” (Romans 5:5).
“And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but be filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18).
Peace,“He saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:5-7)
True - Jesus did say that it was better that he had never been born - because of what he was about to do.True, but I always thought Judas was the one about which Christ said it would be better if he had never been born:
Matt 26:23-25
23 He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me. 24 The Son of man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” 25 Judas, who betrayed him, said, “Is it I, Master?” He said to him, “You have said so.”
It makes Judas sound like one of the “vessels of wrath” that are written about. Just because he was sent on missionary journeys and did healings does not mean he was ever saved, either. Jesus may have been speaking of him when He said “I never knew you”.
Yes Jeri, reading all of Roberts post can you still not acknowledge Baptism and all that it does for us, receiving the power of Christ which infuses the soul with his life and love,removing sin and giving us sanctifying grace .If it is nothing but a mere declaration of righteousness, as opposed to a real righteousness, then how can you say one truly becomes holy? Does there not have to be real change? Your imputed righteousness position seems rather weak and unsupportable to mePeace,Robert
I think you say one thing but practice another. You believe that if you commit a “mortal” sin you fall from grace. As a Catholic, what do you have to DO to return to a state of grace?Are we not all in agreement that this does not happen? If you doubt the Catholic position on this, then I suggest that you read the Joint Declaration on Justification.
I present the arguments in my own words and you disagree and call them heresy; I present the same positions from the early church and you fully agree and call them Catholic. That is the mark of an idealog.Brian, this is a Catholic docuement, written by a Catholic. So far, all the quotes you have taken from it represent Catholic Teaching. I am not sure why that is so hard for you to accept. How would your life change if you had to admit that the Catholic Church has it right?
References please?We also accept the Apostolic Teaching that when we sin, we are not “in Him” and not pure. Sin is not pure. When we sin, we reject the free gift of God, and fall from grace. Gifts can be left by the side of the road.
Excuse me? They must be reconciled to God, as they have crucified the son of God afresh??? Did the Catholic Church rewrite the Scriptures?That is just it, Brian. When a person sins, they separate themselves from Christ. They are no longer walking in the obedience of faith. They must be reconciled to God, as they have crucified the son of God afresh.
Brian you Quote out of context. You forget what we have been telling you and what the Scriture tells us…Unless you repent , confess and receive forgiveness. Don’t you know wwe have a merciful God who forgives when we fall and turn back to him contrite?“For it is impossible to renew again to repentance those that were once enlightened, and had tasted of the heavenly gift, and had become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and had tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the coming age, and have fallen away, crucifying to themselves the Son of God anew, and putting him to an open shame.” (Heb. 6:4-6).
Carlan, I don’t think you understand what is being stated in Hebrews 6. The apostle is referring to spiritual sin, not the sin of giving in to carnal temptations. When Christians, who are in relationship with Christ, sin, it is as Paul described in Romans 7. What is being stated in Hebrews 6 is entirely different. This is referring to sin against the Holy Spirit for which there is no forgiveness.Brian you Quote out of context. You forget what we have been telling you and what the Scriture tells us…Unless you repent , confess and receive forgiveness. Don’t you know wwe have a merciful God who forgives when we fall and turn back to him contrite?
Peace, Carlan
So when one sins they no longer are saved. straight from scripture which you quotedI think you say one thing but practice another. You believe that if you commit a “mortal” sin you fall from grace. As a Catholic, what do you have to DO to return to a state of grace?
.who has rewrote it, indeed hmmm.?
The sin sgainst Holy Spirit for which there is no forgiveness is FINAL impenitence. Any reputable Protestant scholar will agree - and many do, such as R. C. Sproul, Norman Geisler and John MacArthur.Carlan, I don’t think you understand what is being stated in Hebrews 6. The apostle is referring to spiritual sin, not the sin of giving in to carnal temptations. When Christians, who are in relationship with Christ, sin, it is as Paul described in Romans 7. What is being stated in Hebrews 6 is entirely different. This is referring to sin against the Holy Spirit for which there is no forgiveness.
I stated earlier in this discussion that I knew of only one person that has committed this sin and that person was Judas. I am not saying there haven’t been others, but I wouldn’t know. When Jesus was with the twelve in Philippi He asked them who other say He is, and then He asked them who they say He is. He wanted them to see that they were given knowledge about Him that most others did not possess. And the knowledge that was known to them was from His Father in heaven, that Jesus was the Son of God. They knew this because they believed in Him.
What is relevant about that is that Judas was not excluded from this knowledge, nor was he a non-believer. He understood who Jesus is and yet he turned against Him with deliberate malevolence. That is why Jesus said it would have been better if he had never been born.
Now take the example of Peter. When Jesus was arrested Peter followed behind. When he was confronted about being one of Jesus disciples he denied it – three times. Peter did this out of the weakness of his flesh. Jesus did not say of Peter, “it would have been better if he had never been born.”
Peter did not fall from grace as Judas did. Peter did not denounce Jesus from the heart with deliberate intent as Judas did. And Judas is the example of the kind of person that Hebrews 6 is referring to. It is impossible for such a person to be renewed again unto repentance.
God is indeed merciful Carlan, and we who love Him have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
Question: How do you rectify the conflict between what Scripture states is impossible with what you say is not impossible?
Matthew tells us that Judas repented in himself (stung with remorse) and confessed to betraying innocent blood. And none of the accounts tell us that Peter prayed; they say only that he wept bitterly.The sin sgainst Holy Spirit for which there is no forgiveness is FINAL impenitence. Any reputable Protestant scholar will agree - and many do, such as R. C. Sproul, Norman Geisler and John MacArthur.
**As for fleshly sin and spiritual sin - it is all **spiritual because, in the end, it involves rebellion against God. When is comes to Peter’s sin and that of Judas - the only difference is that Judas was apparently impenitent - Peter wasn’t. Peter wept and prayed, whereas Judas went and hanged himself. He could have repented, but chose instead to dispair.
*Jesus didn’t say that it was better if Judas had never been born simply ***because of his betrayal - but because of his impenitence.
I think it is important to highlight that bit. Most forget the “of the law” part.Do I think Paul is foolish? What would make you ask such a question? Have I said anything that makes you think that?
But since we are on the topic, Paul said that he often did what he knew he should not do and that he didn’t do what he knew he should. I think Paul summed our condition quite succinctly and I have no doubt he is with the Lord. Paul also said "For we hold that one is justified by faith, APART from works of the law" Romans 3:28 Then there is this: Every sin will be forgiven except for blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Unless the Bible is lying, then that settles it for me.
God Bless.
Tell me, if a “saved” Christian apostatizes and say becomes an atheist and does all sorts heinous things then dies. Do you think he is still saved considering he was once saved?I didn’t say Romans 11 was about slaves. I asked you what the context of Romans 11 is since that is what you quoted.
The ‘slaves’ question is referring to Paul who is speaking about working out their own way in Ephesians 6.
I could have been more clear on what exact scripture I was asking about. My bad on that.
Let’s go on to Philippians 2 which is where I think you are probably heading. Do you see anything in that chapter that says you can lose your salvation? Here is the entire verse:
So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but how much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;*** for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.,***
Anything there about having lost a relationship with Christ? We respond to Christ with fear and trembling. God is the one who does the work. Yes?
Good morning Holly, Thanks for the very informative blog site.One of my recent blog posts is about the false doctrine of “once saved, always saved”. The link to my blog is in my signature.![]()
I think you are grasping the fringe to make your argument. The definition you present in your article that once a person is saved they have eternal security “regardless of how they lived their life,” is absurd. You say this is the belief of “many Protestants” yet you offer no examples to back that up.One of my recent blog posts is about the false doctrine of “once saved, always saved”. The link to my blog is in my signature.![]()
Maybe you should read St. Paul’s writings ( 1cor 4:3-5 , Philippians 2:12)!I think you are grasping the fringe to make your argument. The definition you present in your article that once a person is saved they have eternal security “regardless of how they lived their life,” is absurd. You say this is the belief of “many Protestants” yet you offer no examples to back that up.
The only claim I made about eternal security is that I am saved. Catholics say I can’t know that. I said that I am held to Christ by love and will never leave Him. Catholics say I can’t know that and I might choose to walk away in the future.
Let’s pretend we are not discussing salvation, instead we are discussing marriage and relationships. If I were to tell you in that context that I love my wife with all my heart, and that I would never leave her, what would you say? Would you tell me that I am foolish for believing such a thing? Or would you tell me that I have real commitment?
Do I grieve my wife from time to time? Yes. Is our marriage over every time that happens? No. Do I turn my back on her every time I do something that upsets her? No. I love her and she loves me and we have been married a long time. And as long as we love on another nothing can separate us.
I don’t think you would find it foolish of me to say I love my wife and would never leave her, but when I say the same thing about my relationship with Christ you think I am foolish. Are you completely unaware that Christ’s church is His bride and marriage is a model of that relationship?
Imagine that my wife had a set of rules and I could only stay married to her so long as I didn’t break any of those rules. But if I did break one of her rules, I could go through a process by which I could have my marriage restored that would require both her mercy and some sort of penance. That is not a relationship, yet your doctrine of salvation paints that very picture.
When two people love each other they are committed to one another. When they hurt one another they reconcile through love for one another, not through legal means.