Perplexed Protestant

[Ptero]

I do not understand why anyone would pit faith against works as if they’re opposing forces.

Faith, is a work is it not?

To be faithful is to act and continue an action, is it not?

Perhaps time is the issue for those who insist that we are saved by faith alone and that peculiar stance is a reflection of their personal cosmology in which they expose themselves as not comprehending themselves as passing through time but see themselves as static.

My own experience has been that there are accumulative moments of revelation that I can only account for by seeing that God has been gracing me enough to see a part of His Truth, or enough of it to cause me to be open enough to consider if there is truth to Christianity.

In the course of my life there have been many of these small moments of grace, but until recently, none were enough to take away enough doubt to allow me to seriously consider the claims of Christianity.

Once that moment happened, while still in the course of being open, I had another shot of grace that I feel tipped the scales of my unbelief. I was reading about the early fathers martyrdom and thinking about the resurrection and it dawned on me that no human would give his life who didn’t honestly believe in the resurrection and too many men and women shortly after the resurrection did give their lives! They were that sure, I think, because of their proximity to the event and to the apostles.

What has been happening to me in my conversion since can still be seen as an interplay of grace and faith and working out the effects of both. The more I pray, and ponder the nature of God and Christ the more desire I have to be with Him, and the more I realize how far away I am.

Of course I want to reduce the distance between me and God. Towards that end I do a lot of things: pray, go to Mass, read scripture, read theology, pray, pray, pray!

To say that doing these things are only the effects of my conversion risks taking away the importance of my even being here yes? It also takes away the importance and belief in what God does for us though prayer.

Conversion is entering into a relationship. You must participate or the other, in this case God, does not receive that which you give- your love, devotion, your faith.

What I sense is that all desire is ultimately for unity with God, nothing else will ever truly and lastingly satisfy.

But I don’t sense that catholics are saying they are responsible for their salvation, so I believe that protestants need to keep on justifying why they are not catholic and this is just one more way of doing that. Catholics should be complimented by this, as catholicism is and always will be the measure of Christianity!

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Ptero:

But I don’t sense that catholics are saying they are responsible for their salvation, so I believe that protestants need to keep on justifying why they are not catholic and this is just one more way of doing that. Catholics should be complimented by this, as catholicism is and always will be the measure of Christianity!

Yes, I think this is possible. I’m sure there are sincere Protestants and I don’t question Socrates’ sincerity. However, when I see the intricasies of Protestant evasion, I do wonder if some of the originators of these ideas knew better but mislead others anyway. I certainly think the leaders of the JWs know better and I think they deliberately and knowingly mislead their followers.

Greg

 

[steveroz]

Hello and God bless all,

Boy, I said I wouldn’t ever get into this again, but I can’t resist. Matt16_18 has rightly pointed out that Socrates has taken many of us down this path before. I read and studied every post in the Ticket to Heaven thread and put my own best time and effort (which paled in comparison to the efforts of several others, including Matt16_18) into helping this apparently sincere seeker of truth. As a recent and very passionate “revert”, I prayed hard that God would use me to help this person, with a background similar to mine, find the joy, beauty and truth that I and my family now revel in. Needless to say, I felt pretty foolish when he quit the thread abruptly upon being called out about the sincerity of his intentions.

To piggyback Matt’s great points in post #118, Socrates seemed to infer in the previous thread that he had his “trump card” with Hebrews 10:14 which says: “For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.” His point was that this means our perfection (which is required by Jesus’ admonition to “Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect”) is a past event and not a present process. I asked him then and again now, how can you believe that and believe that you can lose your salvation? If you have already been made perfect by none other than the only Son of God, how in the heck do you become un-perfect? It seems that the Church of Socrates, in order to be theologically consistent, needs to subscribe to the Once Saved Always Saved theory.

Now for Romans. Scott Hahn has a great study of Romans on tape which acknowledges that this is the primary book used by Luther and all the Protestants that followed him to promote Sola Fide. He then uses only Romans to show how Catholic St. Paul’s wonderful letter really is. I don’t have the time or the trust in Socrates’ motives to get into it all (however, I will give you the entire tape series if you really want to seek the truth) but I will say that you have to read Romans, like all sacred scripture, in context. And Paul’s main theme in this letter is that salvation is for everyone, Jews and Gentiles. The oft-quoted 3:10, “None is righteous, not one…” is a quote from Psalm 14. I f you read this Psalm and put it in context you see that Paul is not referring to every single individual person, but all “peoples” – Jew and Gentile. Also consider that the first and last times that Paul uses the word “faith” in this letter he talks of the “obedience of faith”. Sounds like faith + works to me.

OK, I’m shutting up and getting outta here - I said it before and I’ll say it again, the people on this forum are incredible witnesses to our faith. I have been blessed by your insights. May God continue to make us holy and righteous with His grace!

 

[steveroz]

Ptero:

I do not understand why anyone would pit faith against works as if they’re opposing forces.

Faith, is a work is it not?

To be faithful is to act and continue an action, is it not?

AMEN!

Ptero:

To say that doing these things are only the effects of my conversion risks taking away the importance of my even being here yes? It also takes away the importance and belief in what God does for us though prayer.

Excellent post! I have often wondered, and never really heard a good answer to the question of the purpose of sanctification to a Sola Fide proponent. If the point is to “Get to Heaven” and you get there with faith, what purpose does sanctification serve? But Catholics believe that the point is to participate in the divine life of God - the beatific vision. God will figure out who goes to heaven, we will spend our pilgrimage on earth doing our best to conform our lives to His!

 

[Matt16_18]

Greg_McPherran:

Also, if one is not Catholic then that person has not fully accepted Jesus anyway so their salvation may be even more in doubt.

This is so true, and I think that that is why so many Catholics invested their time with Soc4u. Many Catholics have seen their own children do what Soc has done – abandon the true faith for the lures of the siren singing the hollow promises of eternal security, a song that leads ultimately to the shipwreck of the faith.

Socrates4u, you have committed the sin of Esau, “who sold his birthright for a single meal.” You had it all, the fullness of truth and the immeasurable gift of the Holy Eucharist . You have sold your birthright for a single meal of cheap grace and easy believism.

Come home as the prodigal son, and bring your children so that they can feast on the Lamb’s Supper. Please don’t deny your children the gift of the Eucharist.

 

[Matt16_18]

steveroz:

Socrates seemed to infer in the previous thread that he had his “trump card” with Hebrews 10:14 which says: “For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.” His point was that this means our perfection (which is required by Jesus’ admonition to “Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect”) is a past event and not a present process. I asked him then and again now, how can you believe that and believe that you can lose your salvation? If you have already been made perfect by none other than the only Son of God, how in the heck do you become un-perfect? It seems that the Church of Socrates, in order to be theologically consistent, needs to subscribe to the Once Saved Always Saved theory.

Excellent summation of Soc’s theology!

It is obvious for Soc to be consistent, that he must believe in OSAS. But which flavor of OSAS? There are two flavors of OSAS; the Calvinist flavor that does not assert that men are free to sin; and the antinomian flavor found commonly among the Baptists.

In the antinomian flavor of the OSAS heresy, once a man is “saved”, he is free to commit any sin he feels like committing with the assurance of salvation. The Calvinist flavor of the OSAS heresy takes a different tact. In Calvinist OSAS, so called “irresistible” grace will destroy the humanity of the elect and turn him into a holy meat robot incapable of committing sin. His salvation is assured because God wills it, and good works will naturally flow out of the meat robot.

Soc4u has claimed that he does not believe that a Christian is free to live like the devil. I am afraid that he has succumbed to Calvinist OSAS heresy.

Both flavors of OSAS do violence to the belief that Jesus is Lord, and that is why I tried to smoke out Soc to find out where he stands in the Lordship controversy. Antinomian OSAS implicitly teaches that the Lordship of Jesus is optional for the “saved” man. Calvinist OSAS implicitly teaches that only the elect meat robots will be obedient to Jesus.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Greg_McPherran:

Hello Socrates,

This is exactly what I am talking about when I respectfully refer to word games and cause/effects. I wasn’t referring to causes/effects - I was stating a simple fact. You force causes/effects into the conversation when there is no need to. This all part of the game - it goes on ad infinitum.

All Protestants know that they cannot expect heaven if they say they have faith and do not live morally and care about their neighbor. This is a just a simple fact that means these works are an essential part of salvation. This is irrespective of causes. Causes do not make this fact false, period.

Greg

Are you saying that nothing causes you to be saved from hell?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Steve M:

Not the cause, but a cause. You have faith. You acknowledge that Jesus is the son of God, and he’s the savior of the world. The beginng of salvation. Not the end, but the beginning. Because of that faith, you trust that if you do what he says he will find it in the kindness of his heart to grant you salvation. That’s were the works come in. When you have the works, your faith becomes more than intellectual ascent(sp?). If you say good works are required to be a Christian, then you have to have them. Without them, ones faith is nothing more the intellectual ascent. I understand what your saying, but that totally contradicts what James and Jesus both say. Works alone are not enough, neither is faith alone, but together, you gain salvation. Not because of either alone, but because of each working together. How do you think one gains salvation?

Steve:

Yes, that’s what i meant: Good works are not even a cause of salvation, although they are always a consequence of it.

And i DO agree that mere intellectual assent (i cheated, i used a script to spell check the word) will never save a person from hell. There is too much easy believe-ism in some Protestant circles. As St. Paul wrote:

“The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissentions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not see the kingdom of God.” (Galatians 5:19-21)

So i concur that a person cannot say he believe in Jesus, or even that he knows He died for the sins of the world, then live like the devil & still make it to heaven. Should we do evil that God may show more grace to us? I agree with St. Paul when he answers this question: “God forbid!”

However, mere intellectual acknowledgement is NOT what a true Christian has. When a genuine Christian sees our Lord’s own words:

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

that Christian does not see the word believe to mean only intellectual acceptance.

What helps me is to look at the word believe in the dictionary. For example, my Webster’s Concise Dictionary has these definitions for the word:

1. To regard as likely.
2. To accept as true.
3. To trust.

Intellectual assent is described by definition # 2. Definition # 3 describes how a real Christian believes in Jesus. It is trust, or complete confidence, in what Christ did to pay the eternal death penalty for your sins & for mine. And a person cannot turn to Him unless he first turns from sin (i.e., he makes a commitment to forever make a U-turn in the road of his life & seek to please God with all the assistance the Holy Ghost provides). However, the trust that saves him from hell is in what Christ did for him, not in what he does for Christ, for Jesus said, “whoever believes in him” not “whoever believes in him and obeys his teachings” are the ones who “shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

If you try to see things from my point of view, you may begin to empathize with my reluctance to accept the Roman Catholic way of salvation. Steve, you said i should trust that the good works God does in me will be rewarded with eternal life. But i see Jesus saying that i should trust in him alone to give me eternal life as an absolutely free gift.

Who should i obey? God or men?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

**… **How can good works be essential for salvation and not necessary for salvation? It is obvious that you have been heavily influenced by interpreters of John Calvin’s faulty theology of justification. “Calvinists” say exactly the same things that you are saying. But the Calvinists also typically reject any idea that human beings have free will. For Calvinists, grace is “irresistible”, and because of their faulty understanding of grace and free will, it is “evident” for the Calvinist that good works follow the reception of saving grace. … Trying to separate obedience from saving faith is like trying to take the wet out of water.

Matt:

You misunderstand me. What i wrote was that good works are essential to living the Christian life, but they are not a cause of salvation.

Actually, John Calvin & his successor Charles H. Spurgeon, both taught the importance of striving to live a holy life in obedience to God. Though you are correct that Calvin believed good deeds are not a cause of salvation & that man had no power to resist God’s call on his life. They understood God’s grace to be irresistible.

I must admit that even though i believe that we have the freedom accept or reject Christ, i cannot fathom how i would now turn away from Him after all He did & is doing for me. You may be correct that it is possible, but “there, but for the grace of God go i.”

You may think it worth considering that the Protestant John Wesley adamantly denied that John Calvin was correct in his understanding of Scripture in regard to freewill. Wesley, as you are probably aware, was the founder of the Methodist denomination, & those in the Wesleyan denomination also hold to many of his teachings.

You may find it fascinating that Wesley, who agreed with Calvin that good works are not a cause of salvation, also taught that men should strive to achieve (& may even reach) a state of sinless perfectionism (which Calvin denied). This idea of being able to live a sinless life with God’s help, i hear, is similar to what Catholic Thomists teach.

True Protestants accept both Calvin & Wesley as one of their own, because they believe that what a person believes about freewill does not keep him from heaven. The acceptance or rejection of freewill is seen as a doctrine that is non-essential to receiving eternal life. So in this case they would follow St. Augustine’s advice:

“In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.”

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Hello Socrates,

How are you?

Socrates4Jesus:

Are you saying that nothing causes you to be saved from hell?

No, I am saying that causes, do not make the following statement false: You must continue until death of your own free will to live your faith by being moral and serving God and your neighbor.

Also, as Catholics we believe that Jesus founded the Catholic Church and sent the apostles to teach the truth about Himself.

Greg

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Yes, exactly. Well said Matt.

Socrates, because we have have free will we cannot guarantee that we will not later reject Jesus up through the time of our death. So there is no faith that saves you once and for all and then the works just happen. Rather, your free will chooses to continue to live morally and lovingly serve God and your neighbor. These continuing good works of free will are essential to salvation. These works may be motivated by faith, fine, but they are essential. If Protestants don’t believe that, then they’re wrong.

Also, if one is not Catholic then that person has not fully accepted Jesus anyway so their salvation may be even more in doubt.

Greg

Greg:

You & Matt make some good points. I’m not as sure on this as i used to be. I used to look at Jesus’ words:

“Whoever hears my words and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned. He has crossed over from death to life.” (John 5:24)

and then i’d say to myself: “Self, those who think one may lose her salvation must be wrong, for Jesus used the word HAS as in right now she has eternal life.”

Then, recently, i had a conversation via e-mail with a knowledgeable Roman Catholic gal who showed me good evidence from the New Testament that a person could indeed turn away from a relationship with Jesus & end up in hell. She really challenged my understanding of John 5:24 & other passages.

Now i’m not so sure where i stand on the doctrine. The answer might be that a person may have eternal life now, in the present, as Jesus said; however, He only gives that life to those whom He knows will keep close to Him to the end. Since He is already there at the end of time, this is not impossible for Him to do.

 

[Steve_M]

Yes, that’s what i meant: Good works are not even a cause of salvation, although they are always a consequence of it.

That is not what I said. Good works are not a consequense of salvation. No where do I find that, or a similar phrase in the Bible. That’s a Protestant creation to help perpetuate the idea that if you don’t have works you were never really saved to beging with, thus once saved always saved.

… Jesus said, “whoever believes in him” not “whoever believes in him and obeys his teachings” are the ones who “shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

Read the rest of the chapter, and not in the NIV. Thats a thought for thought, not word for word translation. The NASB is considered the best word for word translation. In that translation, John 3:36 says “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” The NIV translates the words “does not obey” as “reject”. Obey and believe come from the same root word. Jesus says at the day of judgement He will separate the sheep from the goats and ask what you did to the least.

Matthew 25:40 says "‘For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in;
36 naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’
37 "Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink?
38 ‘And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You?
39 ‘When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’
40 " The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’
41 "Then He will also say to those on His left, Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
42 for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink;
43 I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’
44 "Then they themselves also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’
45 "Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’
46 “These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

He’s not asking them if they “truly believer” or if they “had saving faith”

If you try to see things from my point of view, you may begin to empathize with my reluctance to accept the Roman Catholic way of salvation. Steve, you said i should trust that the good works God does in me will be rewarded with eternal life. But i see Jesus saying that i should trust in him alone to give me eternal life as an absolutely free gift.

From reading the previous passage you can see Jesus says nothing about believeing or having faith. He says to do something. He doesn’t say “If you have faith, I know you’ll do XYZ” That takes the free will out of the equation.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Greg_McPherran:

Hello Socrates,

How are you?

No, I am saying that causes, do not make the following statement false: You must continue until death of your own free will to live your faith by being moral and serving God and your neighbor.

Also, as Catholics we believe that Jesus founded the Catholic Church and sent the apostles to teach the truth about Himself.

Greg

So you may appreciate my striving to know what are the true causes of salvation?

The way i see it is this: Either Protestants or Catholics are sincere, but sincerely wrong, for they cannot both be correct on the way to heaven. If good works is a cause of eternal life, then i’m worshiping with the wrong crowd. If good works are not a cause of eternal life, then it would be a serious mistake to put my trust in those good works. Such a mistake, Protestants warn me, will land me in hell.

Do you see why this is not a decision i may take lightly?

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Socrates4Jesus:

Greg:

You & Matt make some good points. I’m not as sure on this as i used to be. I used to look at Jesus’ words:

“Whoever hears my words and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned. He has crossed over from death to life.” (John 5:24)

and then i’d say to myself: “Self, those who think one may lose her salvation must be wrong, for Jesus used the word HAS as in right now she has eternal life.”

Then, recently, i had a conversation via e-mail with a knowledgeable Roman Catholic gal who showed me good evidence from the New Testament that a person could indeed turn away from a relationship with Jesus & end up in hell. She really challenged my understanding of John 5:24 & other passages.

Now i’m not so sure where i stand on the doctrine. The answer might be that a person may have eternal life now, in the present, as Jesus said; however, He only gives that life to those whom He knows will keep close to Him to the end. Since He is already there at the end of time, this is not impossible for Him to do.

I think you may wish to consider the concept of being saved as a state of grace that you are free to reject. However, if you persevere until death you will indeed have eternal life with Jesus. Consider that a person has God’s promise of eternal life and he/she is now aware of His promise and His promise will not fail. In this way God’s promise is indeed permanent. The receiver of the promise must not turn away from God. Think of it like a signed contract, but you can cancel the contract. As long as you don’t cancel the contract, then you will indeed be saved, so in that sense the contract is guaranteed. You see the guarantee of salvation is God’s part, His guarantee is indeed permanent. However, you can always decide you no longer want to be in the “contract”.

I’m not sure if this concept of contract is exactly right, but it may help to shed some light on Biblical statements that seem to indicate “once saved, always saved”. I think we have to remember that we are saved but we still have free will to reject it.

Remember, also, that Hebrew people had a cultural way of talking about things in terms of bargaining (consider Abraham when he spoke to God about sparing the city). The kind of expression may be present in the Bible and we can misunderstand the meaning sometimes.

Best,
Greg

 

[Steve_M]

I

think the difficulty i’m having is that Romans 2:6-8 seems ambiguous to me. The passage which states:

“God 'will give to each person according to what he has done. To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger.”

may either be understood in the way that you explained, or it may be understood as the note on Romans 2:6-7 in the margin of my New International Version of the Bible…

In the following verses Paul is telling the Christian Churches how to live their lives.

Colossians 1:10-12
And we pray this in order that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and may please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God, 11being strengthened with all power according to his glorious might so that you may have great endurance and patience, and joyfully 12giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in the kingdom of light.

2 Thessalonians 1:4
Therefore, among God’s churches we boast about your perseverance and faith in all the persecutions and trials you are enduring.

1 Timothy 6:11
But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness.

2 Timothy 3:10
You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life, my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance,

In all of these, the word that is translated “persistence” in Romans 2:7, is the same word, hupomone, that is translated as "patience, endurance, and perseverance. Paul is telling these churches to live in a certain way. He tells the Church in Rome that if they live that way they will receive eternal life. I’ll say it again, there’s absolutely no conflict or ambiguity about salvation when you take the New Testament in it’s entirety. If you’re pulling individual verses out of context, they might seem in conflict with other verses. Every time salvation is mentioned by Jesus, or any other writer in the Bible for that matter, they do not give the entier plan. They are frequently talking about only parts of it, but if you read it all, you find the entire plan.

 

[Philthy]

Soc4Jesus = black
Philthy = blue

Yes, that’s what i meant: Good works are not even a cause of salvation, although they are always a consequence of it.
please don’t continue to just say ‘good works’ you need to specify good works alone or good works with faith. And everyone on this thread agrees that good works are not a CAUSE of salvation. They CONTRIBUTE to it once salvation has been initiated by Gods grace
And i DO agree that mere intellectual assent (i cheated, i used a script to spell check the word) will never save a person from hell. There is too much easy believe-ism in some Protestant circles.
Yes but you must remember it comes from an interpretation of Scripture that ultimately has no authority.

So i concur that a person cannot say he believe in Jesus, or even that he knows He died for the sins of the world, then live like the devil & still make it to heaven. We are all on board with that!
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16) Interesting in that my Bible (NAS) says “might not perish but might have eternal life”.

Ill finish on the next post

 

[Philthy]

Soc4Jesus = black
Philthy = blue

For example, my Webster’s Concise Dictionary has these definitions for the word believe:

1. To regard as likely.
2. To accept as true.
3. To trust.

Intellectual assent is described by definition # 2 Actually, I think “to understand as true” would best characterize intellectual assent. Definition # 3 describes how a real Christian believes in Jesus. It is trust, or complete confidence in what Christ did to pay the eternal death penalty for your sins & for mine. Yea but you cant just sit on your behind “believing” And a person cannot turn to Him unless he first turns from sin (i.e., he makes a commitment to forever make a U-turn in the road of his life & seek to please God with all the assistance the Holy Ghost provides)So far your doing a pretty good job of defending the Catholic position! What you fail to recognize is that the Uturn leads to a road that you must CONTINUE ON. It exists in time and space and must be followed daily . However, the trust that saves him from hell is in what Christ did for him, not in what he does for Christ Actually what Christ did was save everyone from absolute unavoidable damnation due to sin and present them with the possibility for salvation, for Jesus said, “whoever believes in him” not “whoever believes in him and obeys his teachings” are the ones who “shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16) Dont forget - thats just your Bible’s translation - mine says “might not” and “might have.” We can put that aside for now, your position still has some holes in it I think. Belief and obedience, Faith and works - they go together my friend. “You imbecile, do you want proof that faith without works is useless?” James 2:20 You continue to delude yourself that your trust must only exist in your mind at a fixed point in time. Beliefs can only be known by their manifestations in the everyday reality of our lives. We’re humans, we don’t have eternal faith - it must be lived each and every day in the things we do, don’t do etc.

Cut short again!

 

[Philthy]

Socrates4Jesus = black

Philthy = blue

If you try to see things from my point of view, you may begin to empathize with my reluctance to accept the Roman Catholic way of salvation. Yes and no Soc. You’ve articulated a very subtle difference between RCC and yourself which amounts very little in the lives of believers. You have basically stated that your belief in Jesus saves you and that it is predicated upon first repenting of sin and living apart from sin. So far your still orthodox. Steve, you said i should trust that the good works God does in me will be rewarded with eternal life. But i see Jesus saying that i should trust in him alone to give me eternal life as an absolutely free gift.
How do verses like “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow me.” fit into this theology? They don’t really, because the Christian life is a struggle requiring perseverance. You try to separate the works which you will do from the trust in Christ that allows you to do them and that is where I think you are wrong. Remember, John 14-21 “Whoever has my commands and observes them is the one who loves me…and I will love him”? I think that loving Jesus is when “belief” becomes something more than “intellectual assent.” In addition to “trusting” Jesus for your eternal salvation do you trust him with every day of your life here on earth as well?
Who should i obey? God or men? BOTH!
Proverbs 3:5-6: Trust in the Lord with all your heart on your own intelligence rely not; in all your ways be mindful of him and he will make straight your paths.
1Peter 5:5 Likewise you younger members be subject to the presbyters…

 

[Matt16_18]

Socrates4Jesus:

You & Matt make some good points. I’m not as sure on this as i used to be. I used to look at Jesus’ words:

“Whoever hears my words and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned. He has crossed over from death to life.” (John 5:24)

and then i’d say to myself: “Self, those who think one may lose her salvation must be wrong, for Jesus used the word HAS as in right now she has eternal life.”

Now i’m not so sure where i stand on the doctrine. The answer might be that a person may have eternal life now, in the present, as Jesus said …

Of couse a Christian can possess eternal life in the present, just as the Apostle John says. But John, Paul, and the whole of scriptures testify that eternal life will not dwell in the soul of a Christian that commits mortal sin.

Your problem is that you are listening to Protestants that don’t understand what John means by eternal life. For many Protestants, eternal life is a clause in a contract that they have with God, and that contract is irrevokable no matter what sin a Christian commits. But our eternal life is not the guarantee of a contract – eternal life is JESUS. Jesus abides in the souls of the sanctified, and the eternal life abiding within can be lost by committing deadly sin.

John explicitly says that Jesus is our eternal life:That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life – the life was made manifest, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was made manifest to us –
1John 1:1-2
A Christian has eternal life as long as he has God dwelling in his Temple."Whoever loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.
John 14:21

Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? 1Cor. 3:16As an example of deadly sin, John makes it clear that a Christian that commits the sin of hatred has no eternal life abiding within:He who does not love abides in death. Any one who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
1John 3:14-15
Scriptures teach that a Christian is the Temple of the Holy Spirit, and that a Temple can become defiled and desolate by bringing into the temple an abomination. When a Christian commits deadly sin, he brings into his Temple the abomination that makes desolate his Temple. God cannot dwell in a defiled Temple, and God will destroy the Christian that makes his Temple desolate.Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you? If any one destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him.
1Cor. 3:16-17

Wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subject to sins
Wisdom 1:4
When one understands that “eternal life” is not a clause in a contract, but that it is God dwelling (abiding) in the person who hears God and obeys his commandments, then one can easily see that there is no contradiction in saying that one can lose the indwelling of God (eternal life) when one commits deadly sin.If anyone sees his brother sinning, if the sin is not deadly, he should pray to God and he will give him life. This is only for those whose sin is not deadly. There is such a thing as deadly sin, about which I do not say that you should pray.
1John 5:16

Believing in heresy is a mortal sin, and forsaking the brethren is a mortal sin.

 

[Matt16_18]

There is no salvation outside the church:… the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk. 16:16; Jn. 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it.

Lumen Gentium, 14