Questions about when people get "saved"

[ltwin]

Is that what I said?

Check 1 Corinthians 13:

And now there remain, faith, hope, charity, these three: but the greatest of these is love.

Love is greater even than faith because God is Love.

I edited my remark to end this way:

The last verse does say that “now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” It is obvious the reason for this. One day, hope will end because we will be face to face with the object of our hope. Likewise, faith will end when we see Christ face to face. As faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen, we will not need faith when the “perfect comes.”

So, yes, love is superior because God is love. However, we who have never seen God know that God exists and the he is love by what? Faith. It is our evidence and the substance of our hope.

 

[poche]

From my understanding getting ‘saved’ isn’t just for mega-churches. This is when someone (a protestant) has an experience of God. St Teresa of Avila described these experiences and said that sometimes God will communicate Himself even to someone who is in the state of mortal sin. It appears to me to be a form of mysticism. I think that how one responds to this form of mystical communication with God is what is more important. It appears to me that most protestants don’t really understand this.

 

[MT1926]

Of course it was not well received but I will throw it out here again to see if it will expound the true protestant perspective on this topic.

Yeah I can see why. It is a little confusing and makes a lot of assumptions.

For Catholics purgatory is a temporary solution,

Yeah you prove that you don’t understand Catholic teachings on purgatory. I can see why you would upset many by misrepresenting the Catholic Church like this.

We believe that you 'HAVE BEEN" saved in spirit, (1st. Cor. 6:17) from the PENATLY of sin.

I don’t see where this verse is talking about salvation. This is more talking about how we are all members of the Body of Christ and the things we do not only affect us but also affect others in our church communities.

Secondly, we believe you are “BEING SAVED” not in spirit, but in SOUL=temporal life, not from the penalty of sin, but from sin’s power. (Rom. 6)

If you would like to explain how you conclude the we are only “being saved” in the"soul" here I’m all ears. But I don’t see it in Romans 6

Lastly we see scripture talking about how you WILL BE saved, not in SPIRIT, OR SOUL, but in BODY, not from the penalty, or power of sin, but from the very PRESENCE of sin in a glorified body.

You didn’t site any verses. Where do we see it?

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

It is noteworthy to point out here that water baptism was not included as a condition for those who do not believe. By inference, we can say neither was it included for those who do believe either.

Yeah, I don’t agree. This is a direct statement straight from Jesus “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” To infer that Jesus said something, after his resurrection mind you, that was meaningless makes no sense. Jesus just told the disciples, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation", before saying this. You realize you just “removed” a word from the Bible. You are saying yeah it is there in the text but we can infer that Jesus didn’t mean to say it so we can pretend it isn’t there. Why would you believe Jesus would say something, right in the middle of the great commision, that He didn’t mean?

That being said, let’s break this verse down from the Catholic perspective. We believe baptism is necessary for salvation. Now keep in mind we are bound by the sacraments, God is not. If He wishes to save an unbaptized individual that is His choice, not ours. We can’t get to the judgement and say yeah I know Jesus said it in Mark 16 but He didn’t say it to the thief on the cross so if your gonna give him a pass you have to give me one as well. Nope doesn’t work that way. That is the sin of presumption.

Anyway Mark 16. He who believes and is baptized. Amen. Now why does Jesus say he who does not believe will be condemned? I think this lines up perfectly with the passages from John. Once again Jesus is using present tense. So from one point of view if you believe and are Baptized you will be saved. However, 20 years from now if you no longer believe you will be condemned. Now why doesn’t Jesus mention Baptism in the second line. The reason is simple, because we can’t unbaptize ourselves. When we are Baptized the Holy Spirit puts a permanent mark on our soul. We can’t Baptize someone in reverse and take away their Baptism. Also, I would argue that Jesus leaving this out of the second line proves that Baptism all on it’s own saves us. Which lines up perfectly with Catholic teaching. We Baptize babies, the Holy Spirit puts a permanent mark on their soul and they are saved. That is until they reach the age of reason. At which point if they fall into unbelief they can be condemned.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Next verse: Ephesians 2:8-9, For by grace you have been saved, through faith, and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God, v9 not because of works, lest any man should boast.

What Gift might that be? The Gift of eternal life is implied.

Everything you post is based on this assumption. You even admit that it does not say this, not sure why you base your entire theology on something you are implying? If you read the entire Chapter you can see that St. Paul is first explaining how Christ reconciles men with God, and then explains how Christ reconciles men and nations with one another. The main subject isn’t the “eternal salvation” it is how it occurs. BY GRACE. That is the subject of the entire chapter. By grace you have been saved. The free gift St. Paul is referring to is Grace, not eternal life. Now I agree eternal life is a free gift but that is not the gift St. Paul is speaking of here. So if you replace grace for eternal life in your theology it actually lines up with what I said.

But Paul speaks of this GIFT as something already possessed.

Agreed that gift He is speaking of is GRACE.

This gift was already received, at least in their spirit through new birth. (jn.3:3)

AMEN. The catholic Church teaches this initial free gift of GRACE is given in Baptism, which is what Jesus is speaking of in John 3.

Let’s finish the passage: “For WE are His workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works…”

This is why Paul can call it a GIFT, A gift is only to be received, not worked for.

Yes totally agree and that gift is the free gift of GRACE. You are reading eternal salvation into the verses.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Who is the “TO US” in the statement? … They were those of the Corinthian Church. They were the eternally saved (public ones) who were preaching the word of the cross. Preaching to who? to those who were perishing. To those who were perishing, this word was folly=foolishness, but to US, (Those “in Christ” who have the Eph. 2:8 GIFT of eternal life, this message is our (on-going ) deliverance. (In this context we now can use the point A to point B journey of salvation.)

Once again you base your assumption on the free gift being eternal life. Ephesians 2:8 is speaking of the free gift of grace.

It was salvation, not in spirit, or eternally, but salvation temporally… deliverance their very souls… They were being saved=delivered from what? … sins’ power! (this is a journey) from glory to glory as the Apostle Paul stated to the Corinthians in 2nd. Cor. 3:18,

I have no clue what you are getting at here. It seems like you are saying it doesn’t matter if we get delivered from sins power. That is just a temporary state and has nothing to do with our eternal salvation, because we are already saved? This makes no sense?

The larger point here is that the word salvation should always be understood in it’s context. If the writer is talking about eternal things, then use the word in that context. If the writer is talking about temporal things, then use the word salvation in a temporal context. Remember the Greek counterpart is also translated deliverance. to be delivered=saved

Maybe you could expand on this more. I can understand temporal and eternal. But it seems you are saying in the end the temporal things have no bearing on the eternal things. That’s what doesn’t make sense to me.

God Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

Hold the big assumption horses MT1926!!

The assumption was a fair way to say it doesn’t exactly say that here! I was trying to be fair about it. However!
I was referring to what we see in the immediate context.

If you zoom out to the larger context of all you find in chapter 1, everything you find in 2:8,9 is validated and confirmed. Paul was definitely talking about regeneration, or salvation, conversion or any other word you want to use to describe a new birth. The salvation he was talking about is in the context of eternity, it is NOT a temporal salvation here.

Allow me to do your homework for you. Paul begins the letter by saying that God "chose us in Him before the foundation of the world. 1:4 Secondly, he predestined us to adoption as sons…v5

1:7 says “IN HIM” we have redemption through His blood, again he’s talking about all the variables to what salvation is about. to be redeemed from the curse of the law…

1:11 goes on to talk about how salvation includes an inheritance. 1:13 gets more specific in his line of thought. he says "In Him you also trusted after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also having BELIEVED you were SEALED with the Holy Spirit of promise.

(He’s talking about new birth here) This is to receive of the Gift of eternal life by the indwelling of the holy Spirit.

again in chapter 2, (closer to his comment, but on the same thought) verse 1 says, “And you he made ALIIVE, who were dead in trespasses and sins.” You were spiritually dead before the holy Spirit came to seal you.

His same thought continues… verse 5, "even when we were dead in trespasses made us ALIVE together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), How were you saved=delivered?.. When Christ made you alive spiritually!

"and raised us up together and made us SIT TOGETHER in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus. Again, this is the working result of salvation=deliverance. We’ve been spiritually raised up and seated with Christ. It is here that Paul returns to the word saved by grace through faith, not of works… There is no assumption using the larger context. BAM!!

 

[tgGodsway]

Yeah, I don’t agree. This is a direct statement straight from Jesus “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” To infer that Jesus said something, after his resurrection mind you, that was meaningless makes no sense. Jesus just told the disciples, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation", before saying this. You realize you just “removed” a word from the Bible. You are saying yeah it is there in the text but we can infer that Jesus didn’t mean to say it so we can pretend it isn’t there. Why would you believe Jesus would say something, right in the middle of the great commision, that He didn’t mean?

You haven’t given this verse much thought have you. I have never though of anything Jesus said as meaningless. Everything he said should be respected and understood. When Jesus said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved.” We understand the believe part, but did He mean water baptized as a condition to salvation also, in light of the many passages that do not include water baptism in the salvation equation?

For instance, John wrote and said in John 3:18, “he who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

This verse is similar to the one in Mark. But notice how the Holy Spirit left out the comment on baptism. Why did He do that if water baptism itself was a condition for salvation?

Here’s another one:
“He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” Jn. 3:36

Again, a similar verse. Notice what is missing. The holy Spirit again left out what Mark’s gospel put in, water baptism. Why did He do this? Could it be for the same reason He left it out in Mark’s gospel at the tail end of the verse?

One last example: “most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears my Word and believes in Him who sent me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.” Jn. 5:24
Again it is a couplet using a contrast. And again the Holy Spirit did not include water baptism into the call to salvation.
Remember the principle of interpretation, “The SUM of Thy word is TRUTH.” Psalms. 119:160 NASV
Here’s one more: “Upon the mouth of two or three witnesses LET EVERY WORD BE ESTABLISHED,”
(you can look this one up, its found in many places both old and new.)
Lifting out one verse of scripture to draw strict conclusions without weighing it against other scriptures is a huge blunder for many people in both Catholic and Protestant circles. It leads to much grief.

 

[MT1926]

Yes, and verse 6 continues "…Therefore, I do not think we can limit the operation of faith to just initial salvation since the context of this passage does not seem to be limited to simply initial salvation.

…that in the coming ages…

Quite honestly I think we are on the same page. We both agree we are saved by grace. We both agree we have to have faith and we both agree we have to do good works. The only thing that separates us is you don’t believe our good work in Christ, after initial salvation, merits additional graces (God’s favor). I see where you are coming from I just don’t get it. If good works are not necessary for salvation then we shouldn’t need to do them.

I think all of Scripture is a testimony to the role of faith.

I totally agree, faith plays an important role. I’m not saying it’s all about works. I’m saying you can’t have one without the other. None of these verses claims faith alone.

Acts 16:31 continues to 33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized at once, with all his family.

Sure looks like they had to also “DO” something. Sure you can say that was after faith or that isn’t a work. However, the fact that St. Paul took them “THAT VERY HOUR” and BAPTIZED THEM AT ONCE", sure makes it seem pretty darn important.

John 1:12. I would ask how do you interpret “he gave power to become children of God”. What is the power and what are the responsibilities of a child of GOD? Also, continue to verse 16 And from his fullness have we all received, grace upon grace. I understand how Catholics receive grace upon grace, how do you receive additional grace?

Acts 15:9 This has nothing to do with good works. This has to do with the Mosaic Works of Law. Also it says He cleansed their heart by faith. If you read to verse 11 it says But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” Faith and Grace are not synonyms.

1 Peter 1:5 go to 17 And if you invoke as Father him who judges each one impartially according to his deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile. If our works have zero value how come we are judged by them?

Romans 11. St. Paul is referencing Jesus parable about the branches. And why were they cut off? Because they bore no fruit (good works).

This entire chapter is a beautiful testimony to the faith of Old Testament saints, but I’d draw your attention to verse 6.

Yes it is, but it doesn’t say faith alone. Let’s look at verse 6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, for whoever would approach him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

I would ask how does one please God? By faith alone? OR By Loving God and Loving neighbor (which we call good works)

I could keep going on but I think if we read scripture as a whole we can see that it is not a testimony to “faith alone”.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

We are saved by grace through faith so that we can do good works. I don’t see any devaluing of works of piety or mercy in that. They are our purpose–a purpose we can only realize by being united to Christ by faith.

I totally agree. I just don’t see how good works in Christ have a value if they don’t add to the grace we need for salvation?

We are aided in sanctification by the means of grace: works of piety and works of mercy which are like spiritual exercise to us.

I think this is what confused me. The way you wrote this sure make it sound like the works of piety and mercy are means of grace. But other places you say they don’t merit grace? You seem to want to separate the two but have to put them together in your definition?

God Bless

 

[Wannano]

That being said, let’s break this verse down from the Catholic perspective. We believe baptism is necessary for salvation. Now keep in mind we are bound by the sacraments, God is not. If He wishes to save an unbaptized individual that is His choice, not ours. We can’t get to the judgement and say yeah I know Jesus said it in Mark 16 but He didn’t say it to the thief on the cross so if your gonna give him a pass you have to give me one as well. Nope doesn’t work that way. That is the sin of presumption.

I agree.

Anyway Mark 16. He who believes and is baptized. Amen. Now why does Jesus say he who does not believe will be condemned? I think this lines up perfectly with the passages from John. Once again Jesus is using present tense. So from one point of view if you believe and are Baptized you will be saved. However, 20 years from now if you no longer believe you will be condemned. Now why doesn’t Jesus mention Baptism in the second line. The reason is simple, because we can’t unbaptize ourselves. When we are Baptized the Holy Spirit puts a permanent mark on our soul. We can’t Baptize someone in reverse and take away their Baptism. Also, I would argue that Jesus leaving this out of the second line proves that Baptism all on it’s own saves us. Which lines up perfectly with Catholic teaching. We Baptize babies, the Holy Spirit puts a permanent mark on their soul and they are saved. That is until they reach the age of reason. At which point if they fall into unbelief they can be condemned.

God Bless

The answer to your question as to why Jesus doesn’t mention baptism the second time is answered by the perspective that baptism is not part of the salvation process but rather a public affirmation of belief in Christ.

If baptism saves you and you can’t unbaptize then it seems to me that is a version of OSAS. If a baby is baptized and that action saves him and can’t ever be lost how can a child who at the age of reason become condemned because of unbelief? That is what I can’t figure out.

 

[MT1926]

Hold the big assumption horses MT1926!!
… There is no assumption using the larger context. BAM!!

Um. Sorry if I hit a nerve. That was quite the emotional response you had there.

Maybe if you would pull you emotions out of this, we could have a discussion instead of an argument.

If you would kindly go back and read YOUR original post you would notice my “assumption” comment was in regards to your outline, not Ephesians.

I was speaking of your “Salvation is used in scripture in a past-tense, present-tense, and future tense solution.”

You are making 3 assumptions:

1. That we have only been saved in spirit.
2. That we are only being saved in soul.
3. That we will be saved in body.

You have not present a biblical basis for these 3 statements. Maybe you have it, I don’t know you didn’t present it. So you are either assuming that these are true or you are assuming that I should already know it. Either way you made assumptions. Sorry if it made you mad.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

You haven’t given this verse much thought have you. …did He mean water baptized as a condition to salvation also, in light of the many passages that do not include water baptism in the salvation equation?

All I can say is how many times does Jesus have to repeat himself for you to believe it. Just because Jesus doesn’t repeat himself over and over with everything He commands is not evidence that He did not command it.

For instance, John wrote and said in John 3:18,…

I have no problem with this verse because in this very chapter Jesus told us ONE, not all, of the things we must believe…5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

When Jesus says “he who believe” what does that mean to you? Why does it mean it to you? And how do you get to that conclusion from this verse alone?

This verse is similar to the one in Mark.

I already gave you an answer for this. You did not refute my answer you just ignored it.

Here’s another one:

Jn. 3:36

Seriously? You are going to point to another verse that is smack dab in the middle of the Chapter on Baptism?"

I already explained this. Simple question…Can a person who has been Baptized by the Holy Spirit be unbaptized?

Again, a similar verse. Notice what is missing. The holy Spirit again left out what Mark’s gospel put in, water baptism. Why did He do this? Could it be for the same reason He left it out in Mark’s gospel at the tail end of the verse?

No because I don’t think we should put the Holy Spirit to the test. I don’t believe we should say we are only going to believe something that is repeat X amount of times. Doesn’t work that way. When Jesus says something once, that is good enough for me.

Lifting out one verse of scripture to draw strict conclusions without weighing it against other scriptures is a huge blunder for many people in both Catholic and Protestant circles. It leads to much grief.

Agreed, but you need to add what you are doing to this …lifting out a verse of scripture to draw a strict conclusion that directly contradicts another verse of scripture.

If you would like to discuss Baptism further start a thread or send me and email and we can hash through the verses. It seems you are ignoring a lot that is being said in John 3 and just honing in on the verses that seem to fit your theology.

I think a lot of it comes down to what you think the word believe means. The way I see it believe means to believe and do everything Jesus said and commanded. Shouldn’t matter if he said it once or repeated it a thousand times. All that proves to me is the people of that time understood what He meant the first time he said it.

God Bless

 

[James817]

A baptized person isn’t gonna be saved if he doesn’t continue in the state of belief he has received at baptism. Look at Ananias and Sapphira or Simon Magus. They were baptized but they weren’t saved.

 

[Wannano]

A baptized person isn’t gonna be saved if he doesn’t continue in the state of belief he has received at baptism. Look at Ananias and Sapphira or Simon Magus. They were baptized but they weren’t saved.

I am really trying to get my head around this. What I am hearing you say is that when one (baby or adult) gets baptized they receive a state of belief. So somehow belief in Jesus is a Sacramental package not a personal heart felt conviction?

 

[James817]

It’s a conviction one receives at baptism. Supernatural faith.

 

[tgGodsway]

All I can say is how many times does Jesus have to repeat himself for you to believe it. Just because Jesus doesn’t repeat himself over and over with everything He commands is not evidence that He did not command it.

I believe everything Jesus says in scripture. The problem isn’t about believing what Christ said, the problem is more about believing what he meant, when we develop and shape our theology. In this case it is a theology on salvation.

Finding other voices from the bible (on any given topic) to confirm and support the specifics of what another person is saying is actually a bible rule found from the bible. So if you want to criticize it simply because you don’t know what you are talking about, do so to the Psalmist in Ps. 119:160 who said,

THE SUM (=all the added parts) OF THY WORD IS TRUTH. His point is: you have not arrived at a truth by simply lifting one verse of scripture out of its context. The question isn’t what did Jesus say? It is what did Jesus mean?

So… what is the truth about water baptism? is it a condition for salvation or not? You didn’t exactly answer it.

 

[MT1926]

The answer to your question as to why Jesus doesn’t mention baptism the second time is answered by the perspective that baptism is not part of the salvation process but rather a public affirmation of belief in Christ.

No where in the Bible does it say that Baptism is only a public affirmation of belief in Christ.

If baptism saves you and you can’t unbaptize then it seems to me that is a version of OSAS. If a baby is baptized and that action saves him and can’t ever be lost how can a child who at the age of reason become condemned because of unbelief? That is what I can’t figure out.

Because it is not Sola Baptismo. Baptism saves us because as Jesus says in John 3 unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Baptism opens the gate to heaven. It does not guarantee our entrance. Well unless we die moments after being baptized that is.

Now once or if we reach an age of reason we need to cooperate with God’s grace. If we don’t cooperate with God’s grace then we are in essence telling God we don’t need you or we don’t feel it is necessary to follow your rules. By these actions we condemn ourselves. Think about it this way if you don’t want to follow God’s rules in this life why would you want to be saved and with God for all eternity?

Hope this helps

God Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

When Jesus says “he who believe” what does that mean to you? Why does it mean it to you? And how do you get to that conclusion from this verse alone?

Okay… I can answer these simple questions. It’s not hard.

The quote, “he who believes,” from all of John’s gospel I gave you is a common denominator to salvation. In order to be saved one must “believe.” Okay… you have a couple of good questions here. What does believe mean to me and why? and how did I get to this conclusion? fair questions that deserve an answer.

I have no choice but to yield to what the word believe means from it’s Greek counterpart. I do not have the right to add my own personal definition or borrow one from someone else. In this case the Greek counterpart (from John’s gospel) also translates into the word trust. To believe is to TRUST. It is that simple.

If I add someone else’s definition, I have violated the passage in question. To believe, according to scripture is to simply trust someone, or someone’s information.

But in the case of salvation specifically, when Jesus says in John 3:18, "He who BELIEVES IN HIM is not condemned, but he who does not BELIEVE is condemned already, because he has not believed in the NAME of the holy begotten Son of God.

The call is to believe or trust in Christ. To trust in His name. This specifically deals with who He is. Well, … who is He? We both agree Jesus is more than just a man. He is the Christ!.

John ended his gospel by saying, “And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book, v31 but these are written that you may BELIEVE that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.” Jn. 20:30,31

To believe in Jesus the Christ results in salvation.

 

[MT1926]

I am really trying to get my head around this. What I am hearing you say is that when one (baby or adult) gets baptized they receive a state of belief.

I think I would say they are given God’s free gift of grace. Thereby we can say they are in a state of grace. Now remaining in that state of grace is the key. If we walk away from God, He will not force us to remain in this state of grace. If we are not in a state of grace when we die then we will be condemned.

Think of it this way Baptism is the cup that gets filled with grace. God fills the cup, which puts us in a state of grace, but he doesn’t force up to hold that cup upright. We have the free will to empty the cup through unbelief or sin. Our cup is empty be we will always have the cup, which He will refill if we return to Him.

So somehow belief in Jesus is a Sacramental package not a personal heart felt conviction?

The Sacraments instituted by Jesus help us to remain in a state of grace. If you want to call it a package that is fine. I’m not a fan of “a personal heart felt conviction”, if our heart felt convictions were always true I would be married to my first girlfriend. Boy I can’t imagine the nightmare my life would be right now.

Think about it this way. I believe Grace is a gift given to us from God that strengthens us and draws us closer to Him. I believe through the sacraments God gives us more grace. I believe through acts of charity and love God gives us more graces.

Based on the above beliefs who do you think is going to be closer to God.

Guy A who goes to church for one hour on Sundays and goes about his life the rest of the week.

OR

Guy B who goes to Church everyday, reads the Bible everyday, volunteers at homeless shelters, gives to the poor, participates in Church functions, etc…

I believe Guy B is going to be closer to God. Now here’s the kicker. I believe Guy B is closer because God merited him additional graces for his actions. Basically, he is only closer to God because of what God gave him. For the people who don’t believe God merits us additional grace, please tell me why Guy B is closer to God? Is it a Godly reason or a human reason?

Hope this helps,

God Bless