Protestants: Sinner's Prayer-What must it say and does it assure Salvation?

[Padrej]

They are two different authorizations and responsibilites. The power to forgive sins was given to all the Apostles, and their successors.

 

[FrJohnB]

They are two different authorizations and responsibilites. The power to forgive sins was given to all the Apostles, and their successors.

The responsibility of feeding and caring for the flock was given exclusively to Peter.

The authority to bind and loose (legislate) is connected to the other two, and none of them operate in isolation of each other. Peter never exercised his pastoral authority apart from the other Apostles.

Peter is not the Head of the church, Christ is. Jesus left Peter with the responsibility for the earthly flock, and Peter passed this on to his successor. The role of Peter serves a unifying function in the Church.

So if, by your interpretation of scripture, feeding the flock was ONLY given to Peter, why were the other apostles sitting around to hear this same command? Why were the apostles also given the same command in other places in the gospels? It is because this was Peter’s restoration.

 

[FrJohnB]

I wish that were true, but it was never meant to be and Christ knew it. He knew that ultimate unity would first start with division, thus he said he came to divide father against son, mother against daughter. I have a feeling we will remain divided, until the very end when all things are brought to him.

I feel you are correct here. Jesus said I come not to bring peace but a sword. Yes we do hope that all will come through us, BUT I take seriously the command of 1 Corinthians 3 where we are not to say we are of one group or another thus thinking we are better as that is Carnal.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna
I believe that if you look at the passage in question I think the key is in the last part “workers of lawlessness.” the next verse picks up where this leaves off 24 “Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock:"
So the key is that it again comes in the works. This parallels Matthew 25: 31-46 the parable of the sheep and goats. The sheep were the blessed ones and entered into the kingdom because out of love the did the works to “the least of these.”

As to claiming assurance I believe that we all have the HOPE of resurrection. BUT how do you reconcile this with all who call on the name of Jesus SHALL BE saved? NOT may be saved.

Interesting points and I agree.

Both and, not either or…

Padrej,
Good question. Not sure how to completely reconcile the two, other than to say that we must consider the N.T. (& O.T.) as a whole to get a clear picture of the requirements of salvation.

What are your thoughts on “all who call on the name of Jesus SHALL BE saved”?
Anna

You are correct that the verses must be taken in context of the whole. By doing so as crazetto points out, it is a both situation.

I agree.

When you call on the Lord it is the first step in Salvation. When you do the works you are growing in your faith.

I agree. Calling upon the name of the Lord does involve some sort of “Sinner’s Prayer.” The repentant thief on the cross uttered one of the most famous Sinner’s Prayers, when he said to Christ, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Luke 23:42)

1 Corinthians 3 speaks well to this subject where St. Paul is upset that he finds some have not grown in their faith and calls them “babes” in Christ and “carnal.”

Colossians 3: 1-17 also speaks of “putting off” the old and “putting on” the new much like you would when you change clothing. Paul also exhorts to **“let the” **several times in this same passage so this passage also speaks to the Christian’s responsibility to change after the confession/profession/sinner’s prayer.

Look if you will at that passage in question and highlight how many times those words that I have in quotes appear; I usually tell my students and my Bible study groups that if something is repeated at least twice to really pay attention to what surrounds it as that is very important. Sadly we loose this in English translations in the words of Jesus when he says “verily I say to you” or “assuredly I say” because in the original Greek it reads “Amen, Amen” so it alerts the reader that whatever follows is important.

Excellent points.

Excellent post Anna, very insightful! The only other thing I could add to what you said are the very words of St. Paul him self, 1 Corintians 4

3 But to me it is a very small thing to be judged by you, or by man’s day; but neither do I judge my own self.

Crazzeto,

I wanted to come back and take another look at this passage you cited from St. Paul. This really is a very clear message that we are not to judge ourselves, or pronounce judgement before the Lord comes.

I need to remember this passage for the next time someone hits the forums running—telling everyone they are going to Hell.

**1 Corinthians 4 (ESV): **1 This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. 2 Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy. 3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. 4 For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.

I think we can definitely say that the Sinner’s Prayer does not provide assurance of salvation.

If St. Paul would not judgment himself and declare an assurance of his own salvation; I would not dare to do so. I agree that we, as Christians, live in the “hope” of the resurrection. Our “hope” is in Christ.

 

[FrJohnB]

Interesting points and I agree.

I agree.

I agree. Calling upon the name of the Lord does involve some sort of “Sinner’s Prayer.” The repentant thief on the cross uttered one of the most famous Sinner’s Prayers, when he said to Christ, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Luke 23:42)

Excellent points.

If St. Paul would not judgment himself and declare an assurance of his own salvation; I would not dare to do so. I agree that we, as Christians, live in the “hope” of the resurrection. Our “hope” is in Christ.

Anna
Thank you for starting this thread. It has been a most refreshing one on this forum.
Fr John.

 

[brb3]

I wish that were true, but it was never meant to be and Christ knew it. He knew that ultimate unity would first start with division, thus he said he came to divide father against son, mother against daughter. I have a feeling we will remain divided, until the very end when all things are brought to him.

You intimate here that Christ provokes men to do evil. You take this scripture too literally. When Christ spoke of the division within families, it is to be taken in the ‘spiritual’ sense. When one becomes disciple of Christ, our loyalty is to Him, … not our family. But, in the ‘literal’ sense, we are to be our ‘brother’s keeper’… and to ‘honor our father & mother’. These are Big 10 laws … and Christ cannot speak against His own Laws, and was the fulfillment of all OT scriptures.

Recall also when one of Apostles drew his sword and cut off the ear of soldier, Christ told them to ‘put away’ the sword. The Beatitudes are the antithesis of Christ bringing division to this world.

Now, regarding ‘remaining divided until the end’ … the Early Church was of ONE ACCORD, all sharing equally, all unified by H.S. If it happened once before, it can happen again. Nevertheless, its at the ‘end time’ that great trials will come upon all, and many will fall away.

 

[Padrej]

You intimate here that Christ provokes men to do evil. You take this scripture too literally. When Christ spoke of the division within families, it is to be taken in the ‘spiritual’ sense. When one becomes disciple of Christ, our loyalty is to Him, … not our family. But, in the ‘literal’ sense, we are to be our ‘brother’s keeper’… and to ‘honor our father & mother’. These are Big 10 laws … and Christ cannot speak against His own Laws, and was the fulfillment of all OT scriptures.

Recall also when one of Apostles drew his sword and cut off the ear of soldier, Christ told them to ‘put away’ the sword. The Beatitudes are the antithesis of Christ bringing division to this world.

Now, regarding ‘remaining divided until the end’ … the Early Church was of ONE ACCORD, all sharing equally, all unified by H.S. If it happened once before, it can happen again. Nevertheless, its at the ‘end time’ that great trials will come upon all, and many will fall away.

If the Early church had NO division please explain the disputes over circumcision and eating food with the gentile converts. Why do you think the Jerusalem council was held if there was NO division, to have a wine and cheese party? Come one be real, they were not all unified on EVERYTHING. Why would Paul say in 1 Corinthians 3 “Why are the DIVISIONS amongst you” if all were unified in the Early Church. The epistle to the Romans, Jude, and James all speak to those who cause DIVISION, so how can you claim the Early Church was all in one accord?

I saw quite frankly no taking of the scripture where you think intimates Christ provokes men to evil, and I do not believe ANYONE could think that. From what I have seen of Crazzeto’s posts I do not believe he thinks that way and in this case is spot on with historical Biblical interpretation.

 

[FrJohnB]

You intimate here that Christ provokes men to do evil. You take this scripture too literally. When Christ spoke of the division within families, it is to be taken in the ‘spiritual’ sense. When one becomes disciple of Christ, our loyalty is to Him, … not our family. But, in the ‘literal’ sense, we are to be our ‘brother’s keeper’… and to ‘honor our father & mother’. These are Big 10 laws … and Christ cannot speak against His own Laws, and was the fulfillment of all OT scriptures.

Recall also when one of Apostles drew his sword and cut off the ear of soldier, Christ told them to ‘put away’ the sword. The Beatitudes are the antithesis of Christ bringing division to this world.

Now, regarding ‘remaining divided until the end’ … the Early Church was of ONE ACCORD, all sharing equally, all unified by H.S. If it happened once before, it can happen again. Nevertheless, its at the ‘end time’ that great trials will come upon all, and many will fall away.

To add on to what padrej posted there has been division in our own church, hence the need for the 7 ecumenical councils. Padrej and crazzetto are very correct that there will always be division of some kind; to deny this would be to deny our own church history.

I find it interesting that you cite the line from the book of Acts where it says “they were all together in one accord;” so let me ask those who are married who are ONE if there are ever any disagreements amongst the two of you. A married couple is supposed to be ONE but yet I know of no married couple who can claim to have no dispute EVER.

 

[Nominefili]

Protestants: Sinner’s Prayer-What must it say and does it assure Salvation?

I am a former Baptist, visiting an Episcopal Church. I know that most Baptists and many other Protestant Christians believe one must pray some form of what is called the “Sinner’s Prayer” to receive salvation.

For those who believe in the Sinner’s Prayer:

(1.) What elements must the Sinner’s Prayer contain?

(2.) If all the elements of the Sinner’s Prayer are prayed, with a sincere heart, does that assure salvation immediately and forever, even before judgment?

or

(3.) If all the elements of the Sinner’s Prayer are prayed, with a sincere heart, does that place a person on the path to salvation, without assurance of salvation, until judgment?

(4.) What Scriptures reveal the need to pray the Sinner’s Prayer?

(5.) What is the approximate date of the earliest known practice of the Sinner’s Prayer?

I welcome all comments.

Anna

(I apologize if this has already been covered, but I didn’t read the rest of the thread.)

There is only one prayer we need. It was given to us by our dear Lord Himself.

Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses
As we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.

As far as assuring salvation, nowhere in Scripture do we read that a particular prayer was a prerequisite for salvation. Here is some Scripture:

“Whoever believes in me and is baptized will be saved.” - Mark 16:16

"because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” - Romans 10:9-12

Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may[a] believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. - John 20:31-32

 

[Anna_Scott]

Protestants: Sinner’s Prayer-What must it say and does it assure Salvation?

I am a former Baptist, visiting an Episcopal Church. I know that most Baptists and many other Protestant Christians believe one must pray some form of what is called the “Sinner’s Prayer” to receive salvation.

For those who believe in the Sinner’s Prayer:

(1.) What elements must the Sinner’s Prayer contain?

(2.) If all the elements of the Sinner’s Prayer are prayed, with a sincere heart, does that assure salvation immediately and forever, even before judgment?

Not according to Jesus Christ…

1John.1 Verses 8 to 10: “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”

1John.5 Verses 16 to 17"If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

John.20 Verses 20 to 23]" When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

or

(3.) If all the elements of the Sinner’s Prayer are prayed, with a sincere heart, does that place a person on the path to salvation, without assurance of salvation, until judgment?

(4.) What Scriptures reveal the need to pray the Sinner’s Prayer?

(5.) What is the approximate date of the earliest known practice of the Sinner’s Prayer?

The CC teaches that all salvation MUST flow through Her… And so it dos!

By a common Baptism in the Trinity, and a common believe in the Trinity; salvation is POSSIBLE outside the CC.

Perfect Contrition; and a act of Perfect charity are required.

The problem then is does God see yor contrition and charity as “PERFECT.”? One simply NEVER KNOWS.

Catholics however; obeying the mandates and authority given to His Church by Christ have the Sacrament of KNOWN FORGIVENESS; NO DOUBTS; NO UNCERTAINITY; plus THE GRACES THAT GO WITH THIS SACRAMENT.

PJM,

Good to bump into you again. Haven’t spoken with you in awhile. Appreciate your comments and also the quotes from Catechism in Post 167–always very interesting.

It seems you are saying Catholics may claim more “certainty” in salvation than non-Catholics.

I appreciate your viewpoint, but do not agree. I think all of us must be careful regarding our claims of certainty. You know—the “plank in the eye” and all that. Though I don’t really think you are passing judgment, just expressing confidence in your faith. I can respect that.

I remain a bit puzzled about the issue of authority to administer the Sacraments. From what I have read, the CC recognizes the Orthodox as holding valid authority to administer the Sacraments (correct me if I have misunderstood); and the Orthodox believe in the “Real Presence of Christ” in the Eucharist, but do not embrace transubstantiation, yielding to the “Mystery” of the Eucharist.

I’ve been attending a very Conservative Episcopal Church. Liturgy is “High Church” and very similar to a Catholic Mass. Many of the prayers are the same. Some are identical–word-for-word , as discussed on a previous thread. The Episcopal Rector believes in the Real Presence, but says he does not get into the Aristotelian philosophy of substance and matter. He yields to the “Mystery” of the Eucharist, acknowledging the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. This seems to be identical to the Orthodox view.

Since this Sinner’s Prayer Thread has entered the inevitable issue of authority; and most of us believe the Sacraments play a role in salvation; I will ask why the CC accepts the Orthodox Sacraments as valid and not the Anglican/Episcopal Sacraments?

Thanks,
Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anna
Thank you for starting this thread. It has been a most refreshing one on this forum.
Fr John.

Fr. John,

Glad to hear it! There have been some great posts on this thread, and the discussion continues.

. . . .“Prayer is the best weapon we have; it is the key to God’s heart. You must speak to Jesus not only with your lips, but with your heart. In fact on certain occasions you should only speak to Him with your heart.” Padre Pio

Well said.

I do appreciate your point that every prayer can be an opportunity to be reconciled to God, but we are no longer “sinners” when we are in Christ. We are cleansed by His blood,a nd we have become the righteousness of God in Christ. The old many is passing away, and the we are new every morning in His grace. To continue to think of ourselves as sinners (separated from God) is not conducive to spiritual growth.

I think we must always think of ourselves as sinners–redeemed through the blood of Christ. We are living sacrifices made acceptable to God through Christ.

The Sinner’s Prayer is generally considered our FIRST confession / repentance, but if we later become Prodigals, we will need to renew / restore our standing in Christ by revisiting the Sinner’s Prayer. . . .

Yes, and the elements of the Sinner’s Prayer are contained in the liturgy.

The question for you is — Can a Protestant Pastor validly forgive sins ? Most Protestant Pastors will say NO, they can’t. They will say only Christ can forgive sins, denying the truth of John 20:20-23. … or else say it ONLY applied to the 12 & Paul.

Being Anglican I would say, YES I could declare sins forgiven. Many Protestants such as Methodists and Presbyterians will give and “assurance of pardon” based upon scriptures mentioned. That is the difference.

The Episcopal Rector does grant Absolution:

“Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you all your sins
through our Lord Jesus Christ, strengthen you in all
goodness, and by the power of the Holy Spirit keep you
in eternal life. Amen.” (1979 U. S. Book of Common Prayer)

John 20:23 Here Jesus was giving the disciples their Spiri-powered and Spirit-guided mission–to preach the Good News about Jesus so people’s sins might be forgiven. The disciples did not have the power to forgive sins {only God can forgive sisn}, but Jesus gave them the priviledge of telling new believers that their sins have been forgiven because they have accepted Jesus’ message. All believers have this same priviledge.

If the disciples could not forgive sins, how do you explain this passage in John?

**John 20 (ESV): **19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. 21 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.”

And here is the point of contention, I would only say yes you can if you were given valid holy orders by a Bishop who has valid Apistolic succession. And even then, I’m not sure about the particulars in so far who may actually receive aboslution.

My lines as an Anglican Bishop have Roman Catholic succession as well as Orthodox. . . . .

. . . .It’s important to our justification before Father God. Exhibit A, of the importance of “Sinner’s Prayer” is Luke 18:10-14 /// Parable of Christ.

“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank thee that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, BUT BEAT HIS BREAST, SAYING, ‘GOD, BE MERCIFUL TO ME A SINNER !’ I tell you, this man went down to his house JUSTIFIED rather than the other; …”

There will be ONE FLOCK, and ONE SHEPHERD … so teaches the WORD. Nevertheless, we are also taught by the WORD that He has other flocks we don’t know about. And He is bringing them all into UNITY, thru/into his Church Universal.
Christ is alway unifying, never dividing. Peace He give to us, but not as this world knows peace. Thus, there will be many wars, and the final Great Tribulation is yet to come.
So taught the Prophets … and John re-confirms in his summary of their prophesies, in his Revelation.

I do pray for unity. I think we are not so different. We are serving one Lord, who is Christ; the same Christ who brings salvation and hope to us all.

Anna

 

[Anna_Scott]

(I apologize if this has already been covered, but I didn’t read the rest of the thread.)

There is only one prayer we need. It was given to us by our dear Lord Himself.

Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses
As we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.

As far as assuring salvation, nowhere in Scripture do we read that a particular prayer was a prerequisite for salvation. Here is some Scripture:

“Whoever believes in me and is baptized will be saved.” - Mark 16:16

"because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” - Romans 10:9-12

Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may[a] believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. - John 20:31-32

I appreciate the Lutheran viewpoint. This is indeed our Scriptural model of prayer.

I agree Scripture does not give us a particular prayer to pray, nor absolute assurance–until judgment.

Glad you joined the discussion.

Anna

 

[blazerdave]

I do pray for unity. I think we are not so different. We are serving one Lord, who is Christ; the same Christ who brings salvation and hope to us all.

Anna

I agree with Fr. John that this has been an excellent thread, and I want to concur with your statement above too!

 

[Anna_Scott]

I wish that were true, but it was never meant to be and Christ knew it. He knew that ultimate unity would first start with division, thus he said he came to divide father against son, mother against daughter. I have a feeling we will remain divided, until the very end when all things are brought to him.

You intimate here that Christ provokes men to do evil. You take this scripture too literally. When Christ spoke of the division within families, it is to be taken in the ‘spiritual’ sense. When one becomes disciple of Christ, our loyalty is to Him, … not our family. But, in the ‘literal’ sense, we are to be our ‘brother’s keeper’… and to ‘honor our father & mother’. These are Big 10 laws … and Christ cannot speak against His own Laws, and was the fulfillment of all OT scriptures.

Recall also when one of Apostles drew his sword and cut off the ear of soldier, Christ told them to ‘put away’ the sword. The Beatitudes are the antithesis of Christ bringing division to this world.

Now, regarding ‘remaining divided until the end’ … the Early Church was of ONE ACCORD, all sharing equally, all unified by H.S. If it happened once before, it can happen again. Nevertheless, its at the ‘end time’ that great trials will come upon all, and many will fall away.

If the Early church had NO division please explain the disputes over circumcision and eating food with the gentile converts. Why do you think the Jerusalem council was held if there was NO division, to have a wine and cheese party? Come one be real, they were not all unified on EVERYTHING. Why would Paul say in 1 Corinthians 3 “Why are the DIVISIONS amongst you” if all were unified in the Early Church. The epistle to the Romans, Jude, and James all speak to those who cause DIVISION, so how can you claim the Early Church was all in one accord?

I saw quite frankly no taking of the scripture where you think intimates Christ provokes men to evil, and I do not believe ANYONE could think that. From what I have seen of Crazzeto’s posts I do not believe he thinks that way and in this case is spot on with historical Biblical interpretation.

Padrej,

I agree; and I don’t think Crazzeto’s post was meant to say Christ provokes men to do evil.

To add on to what padrej posted there has been division in our own church, hence the need for the 7 ecumenical councils. Padrej and crazzetto are very correct that there will always be division of some kind; to deny this would be to deny our own church history.

I find it interesting that you cite the line from the book of Acts where it says “they were all together in one accord;” so let me ask those who are married who are ONE if there are ever any disagreements amongst the two of you. A married couple is supposed to be ONE but yet I know of no married couple who can claim to have no dispute EVER.

Fr. John,

Good analogy, especially since the Church belongs to Christ.

I think through the hope of unity, we must work toward understanding our differences and celebrating our similarities. CAF is a great place for this very purpose.

Anna

P.S. Must sign off. Still making the trek to the library for the Internet. My computer is still ill; and I fear it will not recover.

 

[Anna_Scott]

. . . . .I do pray for unity. I think we are not so different. We are serving one Lord, who is Christ; the same Christ who brings salvation and hope to us all.

Anna

I agree with Fr. John that this has been an excellent thread, and I want to concur with your statement above too!

blazerdave,

I was just about to sign off when I saw your post. Would you offer any comments on the Sinner’s Prayer?

Thanks,
Anna

 

[blazerdave]

Absolutely. I always tread lightly on this topic (which is why I’ve just been reading this thread rather than jumping in with guns blazing ). Honestly, so much has been said already, that I don’t think I can add much to it. All I can say is this: I believe that both faith and repentance are gifts from the Holy Spirit rather than choices we make. He uses whatever means He will to bring sinners to faith in Christ. Therefore, even if we are to pray a “sinner’s prayer” of sorts, I would never say that praying it “makes one saved” or is the moment one “got saved” or any other common American churchspeak lingo. The Lord is the Shepherd who pursues His lost sheep; the sheep don’t have to pray a prayer to “get” Him to pursue and save them!

And as for the more recent discussions, I definitely like the prayers that are found in our liturgy . The attitude of “Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner” is one that is always appropriate - especially before Communion. And I’m with you on the John 20 Forgiveness of Sins passage (granting authority to the Apostles). But I guess that’s no surprise since I’m Anglican too

 

[TriuneUnity]

Therefore, even if we are to pray a “sinner’s prayer” of sorts, I would never say that praying it “makes one saved” or is the moment one “got saved” or any other common American churchspeak lingo.

Every prayer that every human has ever uttered has been a sinner’s prayer!

 

[blazerdave]

Great point. Exactly!

 

[brb3]

If the Early church had NO division please explain the disputes over circumcision and eating food with the gentile converts.

Why would Paul say in 1 Corinthians 3 “Why are the DIVISIONS amongst you” if all were unified in the Early Church.

The epistle to the Romans, Jude, and James all speak to those who cause DIVISION, so how can you claim the Early Church was all in one accord?

Excuse me, did I say the Bible teaches there would never be divisions ? :nope:

I said the Church got off to the proper start, when ALL were UNIFIED, and ‘SHARED ALL THINGS IN COMMON’. And that if it happened ONCE, it COULD happen again … :yup:

Now, lets look at the verse from Paul above, you cite. It makes my case … that the apostle knew it was Christ’s will that the Church be unified. Paul is experiencing much angst over the reported divisions in the Church @ Corinth … and expresses his disapointment in the form of a question. His question implys unity is the NORM, and the Exceptation of CHRIST for His Church.

Nevertheless, the reality is that satan knows all too well how sow division in the Church. Whenever the wheat and tares grow together, its important that the Church elders maintain the peace. This was Peter’s role, and now the Pope’s. The trustworthy shepherd will always manage to guide the flock thru the many perils. The Early Church found ‘excommunication’ of value … :idea:

 

[brb3]

To add on to what padrej posted there has been division in our own church, hence the need for the 7 ecumenical councils.

I find it interesting that you cite the line from the book of Acts where it says “they were all together in one accord;” so let me ask those who are married who are ONE if there are ever any disagreements amongst the two of you. A married couple is supposed to be ONE but yet I know of no married couple who can claim to have no dispute EVER.

The Ecumenical councils were need to remove/correct the teachings of the goats, not the sheep. They were purgative and unifying. How can the Church be the SHINING CITY ON THE HILL, THE LIGHT TO THE WORLD … if it is not UNIFIED, AND SPEAKING WITH ONE ACCORD ?

Your married couple analogy is not appropriate to the question at hand. Paul even intimated as much, when he taught it was better to remain single. Apparently he was or had been married [Pharisees were require to] … and learned the single life was better suited to his ministry. He taught the married would expience more ‘worldly’ grief … and he was right.

But, to answer more exactly … yes, two Christians can come very close to realizing Unity. You have to turn the other cheek, and to follow the Lord’s Prayer. There are many Protestant preacher/wife combos that are w/o strife.