Personal interpretation clause

[BereanRuss]

JL: Rahab was not saved by faith alone. She was saved by the obedience of faith working in love…

You are correct. True faith produces works. But Rahab was not saved by the “works of the law” because no man shall be justified by the works of the law according to the Bible. The law only produces death, not life. She was saved by her faith and her faith produced, “works for faith”.

Works of faith can only be genuine when we are led by the Spirit of God. Therefore, works of faith are only possible if you are already saved by the grace of God and have received His Spirit.

But the works of the law can never save any man. I can never be saved by approaching God through my good works such as reading my Bible or praying 5 hours a day or by attending mass 7 days a week or being confirmed or receiving communion or going to confession.

There is nothing I can do to be saved except believe in the One that God has sent. After I place my faith in Jesus He fills me with His Holy Spirit and He leads me into many good works that He has prepared for me. But these works are not done in my power, nor are they works of the Law. They are works of faith and they are accomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit. Apart from Me you can do nothing.

All of OUR works are as filthy rags but the works that God performs in us by the power of His Spirit glorify His name so that no man may boast in His presence.

 

[BereanRuss]

…Also Rahab would not have been saved had she continued in prostitution.

We do not know how long Rahab continued in prostitution. She may have continued earning a living in that trade for some time. We are not told.

When a person is saved, they are still sinners. If perfection were required for heaven (which it is by the way), then none of us are fit for heaven because there are …none righteous, no not one.

When a person is born again they may be delivered immediately from some sins. For example, a drunkard may never take another drink for their entire lives once they are born again. But some sins God allows us to continue to struggle with for years, maybe even for our entire lives. The same drunkard who no longer drinks after receiving Jesus as their Savior may continue to struggle with lustful thoughts long after they are saved.

Both drunkenness and lusting are sin and both are deserving of hell.

We are not saved by our works. We are not saved by what we do or don’t do. We are saved by receiving Jesus as our Savior and being born again.

For if righteousness were by the law, then Christ died in vain.

 

[bradwill911]

But the works of the law can never save any man. I can never be saved by approaching God through my good works such as reading my Bible or praying 5 hours a day or by attending mass 7 days a week or being confirmed or receiving communion or going to confession.

• This is one thing that puzzles me about Protestants, especially anti-Catholic ones. You think that we believe that we are working our way into heaven or earning our salvation. You say that good works come from good faith and assume that we separate our works from our faith. Good works, which we believe are required (while you believe are implicit in “real” faith) are not separated from God and cannot be separated from His grace. I don’t go to daily Mass or read Scripture to earn my salvation! It is because of Jesus that I do those things, not because of me. My faith is not in my works or in ANYTHING that I do, but it is in my Redeemer and Savior! So please, pretty please, do not misrepresent the Catholic Church by stating or implying that we put our faith in our works or that we believe we can work our way into heaven!

There is nothing I can do to be saved except believe in the One that God has sent.

• James 2:19 says that even the devils (or demons) believe and shudder.

/QUOTE]

 

[jlhargus]

You are correct. True faith produces works. But Rahab was not saved by the “works of the law” because no man shall be justified by the works of the law according to the Bible. The law only produces death, not life. She was saved by her faith and her faith produced, “works for faith”.

JL: Of course Rahab was not saved by the law. I see we mostly agree, with the exception of your misconception of Catholic teaching. As far as Rahab repentance is necessary, though she may have struggled. Also scripture calls some righteous Lk1:5 THERE was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And THEY WERE BOTH RIGHTEOUS BEFORE GOD, WALKING in ALL the commandments and ordinances of the Lord BLAMELESS.

 

[BereanRuss]

My faith is not in my works or in ANYTHING that I do, but it is in my Redeemer and Savior!

Glad to hear it! Praise God!

There are things that you don’t understand about me and vice versa. One thing I don’t understand about Catholics is that they often say things that contradict – at least in my small mind. For example, you say that your faith in not in your works – great – but then Catholics will claim that they must receive the Eucharist.

As PJM said earlier in this same thread,

No Catholic Priest = no Jesus in the Eucharist = no Church = No Salvation!

In other words, if I don’t DO certain things then I cannot be saved. My friend, that is a work of the law. Anytime you are required to do a certain deed and the punishment for not doing it is separation from God, you are attempting to approach God by the law. And if you are under part of the law, then you are required to keep all of the law.

And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law.

And so the Priest must “work” to perform the transubstantiation and the people must be sure to be present to receive the Eucharist. The result of all of this “work” is that the people may enter heaven. But by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in the sight of God. For by the law is the knowledge of sin.

 

[mo3]

Well, I have spent many hour speaking (blogging) with catholic clergy that would not agree with you.

This is not a real source. Please provide an official Catholic source with documentation, ie the Catechism.

Not to mention many official infallible statements by the church like:

If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of its increase, let him be anathema.

Please provide a source so context can be obtained. Besides that, this statement does not say “salvation” is obtained by works. This is your interpretation.

Before we continue, I think it is best to state the definition of “works.”

Catholic definition of “works” = good deeds or works that are done with grace freely given (not earned) by Jesus Christ for which one has chosen to cooperate with.

Protestant definition of “works” = good deeds done by human beings, no grace from Jesus Christ.

Please tell me what is wrong with the Catholic definition of “works?”

Look at James 5:20 above and ask yourself, “who’s soul is being saved from death?” It is the “sinner”, right? Who then has his sins covered?

No it is not the sinner who’s sin in covered. Please go back and read James 5:20 again. Besides, using your interpretation, a sinner would not need his sins covered after he comes back because Jesus Christ has already died for his sins. Your logic would be contradicted.

James 5:20 - he should know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

So, it is the sinner who has had his sins covered, not the one who brought them back.

No, the words of the text of James 5:20 do not say the “sinner” has his sins covered. It is the one who brought him back. Remember, using your interpretation, a sinner would not need his sins covered after he comes back because Jesus Christ has already died for his sins.

And, yes, love covers a multitude of sins. If I love someone I will not expose their sin (even as Joseph loved Mary and did not want to put her away) but I will cover it. Again, I am not earning forgiveness – The believer can’t earn forgiveness nor does he need to earn forgiveness because they are already forgiven.

Peter 4:8 8 - Above all, let your love for one another be intense, because love covers a multitude of sins.

Yes, you are correct; love covers a multitude of sins! We agree!

Thanks for your consideration. God bless.

 

[BereanRuss]

…scripture calls some righteous Lk1:5 THERE was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And THEY WERE BOTH RIGHTEOUS BEFORE GOD, WALKING in ALL the commandments and ordinances of the Lord BLAMELESS.

The law of God provided atonement for sin through the animal sacrifices offered to God at the hands of the priest. No one is without sin and Zacharias and his wife are no exception. However, they were both righteous before God because, though they were sinners, they trusted in the offerings that God had prescribed to cover their sin. They believed the word of God and acted in accordance with it. Therefore they were both righteous before God.

God has provided a sacrifice for our sin as well and those who are trusting in Christ are righteous before Him, called “saints” and are a royal priesthood.

 

[jlhargus]

The law of God provided atonement for sin through the animal sacrifices offered to God at the hands of the priest. No one is without sin and Zacharias and his wife are no exception. However, they were both righteous before God because, though they were sinners, they trusted in the offerings that God had prescribed to cover their sin. They believed the word of God and acted in accordance with it. Therefore they were both righteous before God.

God has provided a sacrifice for our sin as well and those who are trusting in Christ are righteous before Him, called “saints” and are a royal priesthood.

Exactly, they were righteous. 6 And THEY WERE BOTH RIGHTEOUS BEFORE GOD, WALKING IN ALL the commandments and ORDINANCES of the Lord BLAMELESS.

 

[bradwill911]

One thing I don’t understand about Catholics is that they often say things that contradict – at least in my small mind. For example, you say that your faith in not in your works – great – but then Catholics will claim that they must receive the Eucharist.

Catholics believe that we must have faith, obviously. We believe in Jesus as our Savior and Redeemer. See the Nicene Creed for our statement of faith. We also believe that we must do what Jesus told us to do. Jesus didn’t say, “believe in Me and that’s it,” Jesus told us to Love God and love our neighbor. In Luke 22:19, he said, “This is My body which is given to you. DO THIS in remembrance of me.” So, where I see a contradiction is when one person puts more faith in their interpretation of Paul’s words than in the words that Christ, Himself spoke. We know that the words in Scripture can’t contradict each other. We also know that Book of James also is part of Scripture and it is fairly blunt regarding this issue.

In other words, if I don’t DO certain things then I cannot be saved. My friend, that is a work of the law. Anytime you are required to do a certain deed and the punishment for not doing it is separation from God, you are attempting to approach God by the law. And if you are under part of the law, then you are required to keep all of the law.

Does this also include loving one’s neighbor? What if I have all the faith in the world, enough faith to move mountains, but I don’t have love? Our definition of works of the law are obviously different. “Works of the law” is referring to the Mosaic Law under the Old Covenant. Under the New Covenant, we are not bound to these works of the law. But Christ did tell us that we needed to do to be His followers. It is only by God’s grace that we are able to follow him. There is a pretty big difference in believing that one can work their way into the Kingdom of Heaven (Old Law) and placing our faith in Christ, accepting His gift of grace, and loving Him enough to humbly and obediently follow what He commanded us to do. Again, Catholicism doesn’t teach faith alone, it doesn’t teach faith or works, it doesn’t teach works alone, it teaches faith and works, which is also what the Bible teaches. You can’t have one without the other, it is faith AND works.

 

[BereanRuss]

This is not a real source. Please provide an official Catholic source with documentation, ie the Catechism.

Counsel of Trent Session 6, Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 12.

Protestant definition of “works” = good deeds done by human beings, no grace from Jesus Christ.

I think a better definition would be:

For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

We are to walk in the good works that God has prepared for us.

Please tell me what is wrong with the Catholic definition of “works?”

As I have explained before, there are no problems with “works of faith’ – feeding the hungry, visiting those in prison, etc. Those works are noble and good as long as they glorify God and not any individual and are not the type of the works that protestants disagree with.

We oppose “works of the law”. Works of the law are works that a person does, protestant or Catholic, to retain or gain their salvation. These works include anything that a person must do on a regular basis in order to not loose their salvation. If there is anything that I must do on a regular basis to keep myself from loosing my standing with God, that is a “work of the law” and there are major sections of scripture (Romans and Galatians) that deal with these types of works. These are the works that protestants (and the Bible) teach against.

No it is not the sinner who’s sin in covered. Please go back and read James 5:20 again.

Ok. I do not have a perfect understanding of every scripture in the Bible. I am still learning and growing.

The problem I have with your interpretation is that my sins are already covered by the blood of Jesus Christ. How can reaching out to a fallen brother cover again sins that are already forgiven?

But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin. [1John 1:7]

If you have a way of reconciling these two scriptures, I am open to learning and growing.

 

[BereanRuss]

Does this also include loving one’s neighbor? What if I have all the faith in the world, enough faith to move mountains, but I don’t have love?

Brad,

Anything that I must do on a regular basis to keep myself saved is a, “work of the law”. Works of the law diminish and cloud the message of the Gospel and that is why there are major sections of scripture that teach against them.

When the unbeliever hears that they are saved by nothing but the cross of Christ but then are also told that they must do things to keep themselves saved, it becomes a confusing message. It becomes, “another Gospel”.

This was a huge probem in the early church. Paul would go into an area and preach that Jesus died for their sins. People would get saved and a church would be planted in that place. Then, after Paul left, Jews would come into that church and teach that the people must do works to remain saved. Paul called this teaching, “another Gospel”.

God has gone to great lengths to protect the message of the Gospel. The Gospel could be summed up this way.

1. All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

All of mankind is guilty before a holy God.

1. The wages of sin is death.

All of mankind is condemned to hell to pay penalty for our sin against a holy God.

1. The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Because God loves us, He punished his own Son instead of punishing us for our sin. Jesus did not suffer on the cross for His own sin – He had none. Instead, He willing scarified Himself in our place so that we could be forgiven.

1. If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Salvation is only by faith in what Jesus did for us. Once a person is saved there are many good works that God has prepared for us to do, including loving our neighbor, and there are many ways to serve Him but none of these works add to our salvation at all. Jesus paid it all – all to Him I owe.

However, when I try to improve my standing with God by my works, I deny the gospel and I fall from grace. Anything that I do in an attempt to improve upon the finished work of Christ becomes a hindrance to my salvation, not a help.

But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works… [Rom 4:5, 6]

 

[bradwill911]

Brad,

Anything that I must do on a regular basis to keep myself saved is a, “work of the law”.

• Must you continue to believe in Christ as your Savior? Well, by your definition, that is also a “work of the law”.

When the unbeliever hears that they are saved by nothing but the cross of Christ but then are also told that they must do things to keep themselves saved, it becomes a confusing message. It becomes, “another Gospel”.

• It’s actually a fairly simple and logical message. Once saved, always saved is illogical and frankly un-biblical. I’m not going to debate this point, we’ll disagree no matter what either of us says.

This was a huge probem in the early church. Paul would go into an area and preach that Jesus died for their sins. People would get saved and a church would be planted in that place. Then, after Paul left, Jews would come into that church and teach that the people must do works to remain saved. Paul called this teaching, “another Gospel”.

• Well, yes, he taught that works of the law were not needed. Works of the Old Law or Mosaic Law was exactly what the Jews were teaching and it was wrong. We continue to teach that. We are now under a New Covenant and New Law and our works, while required (according to Scripture) are not possible without the grace of God.

God has gone to great lengths to protect the message of the Gospel. The Gospel could be summed up this way.

1. All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

• Agree, we call man’s fallen nature “Original Sin”

All of mankind is guilty before a holy God.

1. The wages of sin is death.

• Agree, every time we sin, we might as well be driving the nails in Christ’s hands and piercing His side.

All of mankind is condemned to hell to pay penalty for our sin against a holy God.

1. The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

• Agree.

Because God loves us, He punished his own Son instead of punishing us for our sin. Jesus did not suffer on the cross for His own sin – He had none. Instead, He willing scarified Himself in our place so that we could be forgiven.

• Still agree. He suffered for our sins and he was sinless.

1. If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

• I believe that this reflects an incomplete understanding of Scripture, but as I said above, there is nothing either of us can say to change the other’s belief. Do we really not need to do what Christ commanded us to do?

Salvation is only by faith in what Jesus did for us. Once a person is saved there are many good works that God has prepared for us to do, including loving our neighbor, and there are many ways to serve Him but none of these works add to our salvation at all. Jesus paid it all – all to Him I owe.

• I agree that there is nothing that we do that adds to our salvation, but I do think that we can continue to accept the gift of grace and that we can continue to become sanctified. We can continue to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. It doesn’t add to Christ’s cross.

However, when I try to improve my standing with God by my works, I deny the gospel and I fall from grace. Anything that I do in an attempt to improve upon the finished work of Christ becomes a hindrance to my salvation, not a help.

• You are mistaken if you think that the Catholic Church believes and teaches that we are trying to add to the work of Christ or to improve our standing with God by our works. My works are done out of love. Without Christ and my faith in Him, I couldn’t earn my way into heaven. There is nothing I can do to earn my way into heaven. Why do you insist that we believe this? Can I refuse and reject Him by my sin? Absolutely. You, I’m guessing, would say that the person who did this simply wasn’t saved to begin with, his faith was not real, but that’s where we disagree. Personally, I have always believed and confessed Jesus as my Savior, but I’ve also fallen so far off the narrow path that praise God I didn’t die in that state. My faith was real the whole time and I believe that is what led me back to the narrow path, but that doesn’t mean that I wasn’t fully off of the path for a time. Did I not have saving faith? Was I not really saved to begin with?

But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works… [Rom 4:5, 6]

• Do you quote Scripture to me because you think that us Catholics don’t read Scripture or believe it?

James 2:14, 17, “What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?” “So faith by itself, if it has no works is dead.”

Or James 2:20, “Do you want to be shown, you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren?”

James 2:24, “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

James 2:26, “For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.”

Why do people presenting your argument always quote Eph 2:8-9, but always leave out verse 10?

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your doing, it is the gift of God–

9 Not because of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus FOR GOOD WORKS, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

So, is faith apart from works actually dead or do we just need faith? Is it safe to disregard what Jesus Himself told us to do because, after all, that would be “works of the law”? My intention is not to go back and forth with Scripture quotes, there are hundreds of other threads that do this.

 

[NHInsider]

There are things that you don’t understand about me and vice versa. One thing I don’t understand about Catholics is that they often say things that contradict – at least in my small mind. For example, you say that your faith in not in your works – great – but then Catholics will claim that they must receive the Eucharist.

I wonder why Catholics would say such a thing?

"Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

Sounds pretty emphatic, doesn’t He? In fact, He’s more emphatic here than He was in verse 51 - after the Jews said “how can he give us his flesh to eat” he switched from “eat” to “chew”.

“Oh,” you will say, “He’s speaking metaphorically”

Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”

Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, “Does this shock you? What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.”
-snip-
As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.

Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?” Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”

Notice that Jesus did not correct those who rejected His teaching by saying “wait, I mean that symbolically.”

There are other things Jesus told us we must do - I’m only using John 6 here because you specified the Eucharist. If we accept His free gift of salvation but then reject the things He asks us to do, we are essentially giving back the gift - “never mind, I didn’t really want it.”

And so the Priest must “work” to perform the transubstantiation and the people must be sure to be present to receive the Eucharist. The result of all of this “work” is that the people may enter heaven. But by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in the sight of God. For by the law is the knowledge of sin.

My friend, that is a work of the law. Anytime you are required to do a certain deed and the punishment for not doing it is separation from God, you are attempting to approach God by the law. And if you are under part of the law, then you are required to keep all of the law.

And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law.

Circumcison is the key word here, because the problem Paul is addressing is the undermining of the faith of the Galatians by the Judaizers, who insisted that in order to be a Christian you had to keep the whole Mosaic law and be baptized.

You quote Galatians 1 where Paul warns against “the novel gospel” and emphasizes freedom as compared with being under the law. But in the very same letter he warns

Make no mistake: God is not mocked, for a person will reap only what he sows, because the one who sows for his flesh will reap corruption from the flesh, but the one who sows for the spirit will reap eternal life from the spirit. Let us not grow tired of doing good, for in due time we shall reap our harvest, if we do not give up. So then, while we have the opportunity, let us do good to all, but especially to those who belong to the family of the faith.

We are saved **by **grace, through faith (not by faith, Paul is very careful here) for good works. (Ephesians 2) It’s a seamless garment. Jesus never separated the two, Paul never separates the two, James tells us explicitly that they can’t be separated. Without grace, our works are filthy rags. With grace, our works are His works, as we are His Body.

Incidentally, the writer of Hebrews thought Mass attendance was pretty important.

Therefore, brothers, since through the blood of Jesus we have confidence of entrance into the sanctuary by the new and living way he opened for us through the veil, that is, his flesh, and since we have “a great priest over the house of God,” let us approach with a sincere heart and in absolute trust, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed in pure water.

Let us hold unwaveringly to our confession that gives us hope, for he who made the promise is trustworthy.

We must consider how to rouse one another to love and good works. We should not stay away from our assembly, as is the custom of some, but encourage one another, and this all the more as you see the day drawing near.

As to whether we must cooperate with the Spirit to preserve our salvation (what we call “living in a state of grace”) the writer continues:

If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries. Anyone who rejects the law of Moses is put to death without pity on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Do you not think that a much worse punishment is due the one who has contempt for the Son of God, considers unclean the covenant-blood by which he was consecrated, and insults the spirit of grace?

We know the one who said: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay,” and again: “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

This is a tired, semantic argument. Check out the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

 

[bradwill911]

Thank you, you stated it better than I could.

Peace.

 

[BereanRuss]

Why do people presenting your argument always quote Eph 2:8-9, but always leave out verse 10?

When did I do this? Read my response to MO3 (#90 in this thread) where I quote 8-10. Even if I have done this at some point, it does not mean that I do it exclusively.

If Catholicism is not based on works, what need is there for the priest? The priest is absolutely necessary to do the work of transforming the bread and wine among other things. All within the RCC must partake of the work of the priest. Without the work of the priest, not a single person can be saved.

This is no different than the work of the priest in the OT. Without the OT priest no offering for the sin of the people could be made and no one could be saved, although David had the boldness to find a way around the offering of the OT priest:

For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, A broken and a contrite heart-- These, O God, You will not despise. [Ps 51:16,17]

If David was not required to offer through the priest under the law, why is the priest absolutely necessary under grace?

 

[PJM]

=BereanRuss;5023519]Jesus said, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!”

How can God hold those who did not repent accountable if He did not expect them to hear and understand His word? From where were they to get the interpretation? From the Jewish Priests and Pharisees who will soon reject and crucify Him? From the Apostles who had only been with Him a short time and were hearing, “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” for the very first time themselves?

God not only allows us to interpret His word, He expects us to interpret and understand and apply His word to every situation in our lives.

Wounderfully profound question my friend! Well done:tiphat:

Rom. 3: " 5 But if our wickedness serves to show the justice of God, what shall we say? That God is unjust to inflict wrath on us?"

It all has to do with God being God. God by His Divine Nature is “all everything good, to its very perfection!”

So I ask, are being “fair, being just” "good things? Of course they are. So therefore God is, has to be, must be both fair and just. Agreed.

So for the sake of this discussion let’s say you steal $50.00 from me and in anger I kill you. as I’m running out of your house to get away, I get hit by a car and myself get killed.

Now neither of us have has a chance to repent, Confess, beg forgiveness. Is God going to treat our sins the same? Judge us the same way.

Before you answer you may want to look up 1 john 5: 13-17

Keep in mind my friend, I’m sharing what the bible say’s not just my personal opinion.

Love and prayers, Pat

 

[BereanRuss]

Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.

If the flesh and the blood of Christ are made available to the believer only by the work of the priest, then only those in the RCC can be saved. Not even the RCC believes this.

The RCC believes that Jews, Muslims, Protestants and others can be saved without eating the flesh of the Son of Man. The words of Jesus are very clear here. Why don’t you believe Him?

 

[BereanRuss]

Is God going to treat our sins the same?

Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord comes, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the counsels of the hearts. Then each one’s praise will come from God. [1 Cor 4:5]

 

[bradwill911]

You left a few questions unanswered, but instead decided to cross-examine me. That’s fine.

If Catholicism is not based on works, what need is there for the priest? The priest is absolutely necessary to do the work of transforming the bread and wine among other things. All within the RCC must partake of the work of the priest.

The Catechism teaches that the ministerial priesthood is a “means by which Christ unceasingly builds up and leads his Church” (CCC 1547).

In CCC 1548 we read:

In the ecclesial service of the ordained minister, it is Christ himself who is present to his Church as Head of his Body, Shepard of his flock, high priest of the redemptive sacrifice, Teacher of Truth. This is what the Church means by saying that the priest, by virtue of the sacrament of Holy Orders, acts in persona Christi Capitis:

It is the same priest, Christ Jesus, whose sacred person his minister truly represents. Now the minister, by reason of the sacerdotal consecration which he has received, is truly made like to the high priest and possesses the authority to act in the power and place of the person of Christ himself (virtute ac persona ipsius Christi).

Christ is the source of all priesthood: the priest of the old law was a figure of Christ, and the priest of the new law acts in the person of Christ.

In other words, it isn’t the priest’s work.

This is no different than the work of the priest in the OT. Without the OT priest no offering for the sin of the people could be made and no one could be saved, although David had the boldness to find a way around the offering of the OT priest:

For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; You do not delight in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, A broken and a contrite heart-- These, O God, You will not despise. [Ps 51:16,17]

If David was not required to offer through the priest under the law, why is the priest absolutely necessary under grace?

• Okay, let’s throw Scripture verses back and forth. Was David not required to offer sacrifice? That IS a good question!

Let’s start with Psalm 51 and keep reading verses 18-19 (I’ll even use the KJV):

18: Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem.

19: Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.

If David did mean that he wasn’t required to offer sacrifice, why did he say that God would be pleased with sacrifices of righteousness just 2 verses later?

So, did David offer sacrifice (something you said he wasn’t required to do)?

Psalm 4:5 Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust in the LORD.

Pslam 20:3 Remember all thy offerings, and accept thy burnt sacrifice; Selah.

Psalm 27:6 And now shall mine head be lifted up above mine enemies round about me: therefore will I offer in his tabernacle sacrifices of joy; I will sing, yea, I will sing praises unto the LORD.

Psalm 50:5 Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.

Psalm 50:8 I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt offerings, to have been continually before me.

Psalm 54:6 I will freely sacrifice unto thee: I will praise thy name, O LORD; for it is good.

Psalm 66:15 I will offer unto thee burnt sacrifices of fatlings, with the incense of rams; I will offer bullocks with goats. Selah.

Psalm 107:22 And let them sacrifice the sacrifices of thanksgiving, and declare his works with rejoicing.

Psalm 116:17 I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving, and will call upon the name of the LORD.

Psalm 141:2 Let my prayer be set forth before thee as incense; and the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice.

And if that isn’t completely clear, let’s go to 1 Chronicles 21:26, “And David built there an altar unto the LORD, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings, and called upon the LORD; and he answered him from heaven by fire upon the altar of burnt offering.”

 

[bradwill911]

If the flesh and the blood of Christ are made available to the believer only by the work of the priest, then only those in the RCC can be saved. Not even the RCC believes this.

The RCC believes that Jews, Muslims, Protestants and others can be saved without eating the flesh of the Son of Man. The words of Jesus are very clear here. Why don’t you believe Him?

Your understanding of what the Church teaches leaves much to be desired