Reconciling Romans 2:13 with the rest of New Testament

[lanman87]

What if a Christian doesn’t?

Then he is not a Christian. His heart hasn’t been changed. He is not a new creation in Christ.

Do you think it is possible to have a saving faith and not have your heart and affections changed?

Do you think it is possible to have a saving faith and not love Jesus and seek to please Him and serve Him?

Do you think it is possible to have a saving faith and have no desire to help those in need?

Do you think it is possible to have a saving faith and not hate your sin and seek to repent of your sins?

You see, I don’t think it is possible to truly have a saving faith without those things (and many other things) happening in the life of the person who has a “saving faith”?

I once heard a preacher put it this way (this is from memory and is a paraphrase).

A saving faith is a loving faith
A saving faith is an obedient faith
A saving faith is a serving faith
A saving faith is a giving faith
A saving faith is a worshiping faith
A saving faith is a compassionate faith
A saving faith is an abiding faith
A saving faith is a working faith
A saving faith is a long suffering faith
A saving faith is a forgiving faith
and so on…

The point being that if we truly have faith in Christ then there will be a change in our life that comes from our faith. If our heart isn’t changed, and our actions aren’t changed due to the change in heart, then we have no claim to having a “saving faith”.

 

[lanman87]

I agree with this interpretation of John 15:1-8

Here is his conclusion. You can read all his arguments in the link

My conclusion, then, is that this passage does not teach that a true, born-again Christian can apostatize from the faith and lose his/her salvation. It does teach that it is impossible to bear fruit apart from a life-giving, saving union with Jesus (v. 4) and that it is impossible not to bear fruit when that connection with Jesus truly exists (v. 5). It also teaches that some (many?) who profess to be “united” with Jesus, who claim to “believe” him, and who even “follow” him as “disciples” will be revealed by their lack of fruit as spurious and thus subject to eternal judgment.

 

[Cathoholic]

Ianman87 . . . .

A saving faith is a loving faith
A saving faith is an obedient faith
A saving faith is a serving faith
A saving faith is a giving faith
A saving faith is a worshiping faith
A saving faith is a compassionate faith
A saving faith is an abiding faith
A saving faith is a working faith
A saving faith is a long suffering faith
A saving faith is a forgiving faith
and so on…

Does it HAVE to be?

Because if it does, then you are affirming what Catholic Christianity teaches as it expounds the fullness of truth here.

And if it HAS TO BE, your divorce of works from justification is artificial. Especially if you admit justification is a lifelong process (following that moment in baptism).

 

[Cathoholic]

Ianman87 . . .

My conclusion, then, is that this passage does not teach that a true, born-again Christian can apostatize from the faith and lose his/her salvation.

Careful Ianman87.

The logical conclusion of this in light of John 15:1-6,
is that people IN JESUS, are not true Christians. At least some of them.

This would be a grievous error.

You would be making up another erroneous tradition of men (being in Christ does not make you a true Christian) to support another false tradition of men (OSAS).

(You are mixing up being of “the elect” with being “born again”.
With no distinction there, the error you fall into is inevitable.)

 

[C.Longinus]

Our sin does not pose a threat to our salvation

According to Christ it does.

John 8:34
Jesus answered them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Whoever commits sin is the servant of sin.

 

[Johan]

According to Christ it does.

John 8:34
Jesus answered them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Whoever commits sin is the servant of sin.

That verse does not say that sin endangers our salvation, and yours is a dangerous idea indeed, because it suggests that Christ has not overcome sin on our behalf. The Christian person is torn between two mental forces: the renewed spiritual mind and the fleshly mind that is still enslaved to sin. Our hope of salvation is found only in Christ who sets us free (John 8:36).

So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. (Ro 7:25)

For the flesh has desires that are opposed to the Spirit, and the Spirit has desires that are opposed to the flesh, for these are in opposition to each other, so that you cannot do what you want. (Gal. 5:17)

 

[Cathoholic]

Johan . . .

Our sin does not pose a threat to our salvation

Here is Jesus on for example, the sin of unforgiveness.

And Jesus is talking to people who have God as their FATHER! He is addressing Christians!

MATTHEW 6:14-15 14 For if you forgive men their trespasses,
your heavenly Father
(notice the people Jesus is addressing here have God as their Father!)
also will forgive you;
15 but if you do not forgive men their trespasses,
(then what? What happens when these Christians refuse to forgive? Fortunately we don’t have to speculate.
Jesus tells us in the very next line!)
neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Here it is again.

MATTHEW 6:14-15 14 For if you forgive men their trespasses,
your heavenly Father
also will forgive you;
15 but if you do not forgive men their trespasses,
neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

(Parenthesis and emphasis above mine.)

And here is what Jesus doesn’t say.

NOT MATTHEW 6:14-15 (but a phantom passage) 14 For if you forgive men their trespasses,
your heavenly Father
also will forgive you;
15 but if you do not forgive men their trespasses,
your Father will still forgive our trespasses because our sin does not pose a threat to our salvation.

 

[Cathoholic]

More of Jesus’ “mistake” about the sin of unforgiveness posing a threat to our salvation.

MATTHEW 18:23-35 23 “Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king (Jesus is the KING regarding the Kingdom of Heaven) who wished to settle accounts with his servants. 24 When he began the reckoning, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents (an absolute enormous sum)
25 and as he could not pay, (we likewise cannot “pay” our debt on our own)
his lord (notice Jesus is his “LORD”)
ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made. (the man who had Jesus as his “lord” was condemned along with others associated with him)
26 So the servant
fell on his knees, imploring him, ‘Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ 27 And out of pity for him the lord of that servant
released him AND forgave him the debt.
28 But that same servant,
as he went out, came upon one of his
fellow servants who owed him
a hundred denarii; and seizing him by the throat he said, ‘Pay what you owe.’
29 So his fellow servant fell down and besought him,
‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’
30 He refused
and went and put him in prison till he should pay the debt. 31 When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place.
32 Then his lord summoned him and said to him,
‘You wicked servant! (notice servants of the King can become “wicked”)
I forgave you all that debt
because you besought me; 33 and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ 34 And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt.
35 So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, IF
you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”

(Parenthesis and emphasis above mine.)

Notice the provisional nature of our forgiveness in this life.

 

[Cathoholic]

Here it is again.

MATTHEW 18:23-35 23 “Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants. 24 When he began the reckoning, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents
25 and as he could not pay, ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made.
26 So the servant
fell on his knees, imploring him,
‘Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’
27 And out of pity for him
the lord of that servant
released him and forgave him the debt.
28 But that same servant,
as he went out, came upon one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii;
and seizing him by the throat
he said, ‘Pay what you owe.’
29 So his fellow servant fell down and besought him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’
30 He refused and went and
put him in prison till he should pay the debt.
31 When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place.
32 Then his lord summoned him and said to him,
‘You wicked servant!
I forgave you all that debt because you besought me;
33 and
should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’
34 And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers,
till he should pay all his debt.
35 So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you,
if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”

 

[C.Longinus]

That verse does not say that sin endangers our salvation, and yours is a dangerous idea indeed, because it suggests that Christ has not overcome sin on our behalf.

I believe Christ died for my sin. What I don’t believe is that I’m automatically in the clear
If I did, I’d make Paul a liar because he said this:

Galatians 5:2 KJV
Stand fast therefore in the liberty with which Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

And I make Christ Himself a liar because He said this:
John 5:14b BSB
“See, you have been made well. Stop sinning, or something worse may happen to you.”

 

[De_Maria]

I literally said maintain salvation.

But you denied conditional salvation.

You can’t get more Catholic than that. And by the way, who appointed you as the determiner of which view of salvation is Catholic or not?

Aren’t you the one claiming that my explanation of conditional salvation was not in accordance with the Council of Trent’s Teachings? First, you tell me, who appointed you?

Bottomline,

1. you objected about what I said. I proved that my words are completely in line with the Teaching of the Church.
2. In so doing, I proved that your objections to my words are not in line with Catholic Teaching.

 

[De_Maria]

What about the part where you said there’s strings attached?

Conditional salvation. In order to receive the gift of eternal life, there are some strings attached. You have to have faith and show your faith with works of love and continue for your entire life.

 

[C.Longinus]

But you denied conditional salvation.

How is saying “salvation is a free gift that can be lost” denying Church teaching? You’re not making sense, are you?

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

What would the Pastor of your church do?

The Pastor would do what he does with all who request for baptism. He ask them to give a testimony of how they came to know Christ, what it means to know Christ, and what difference knowing Christ has made in their life. If the man claimed to know Christ yet was living a worldly lifestyle then he would be asked why he was living a worldly lifestyle if he "knows Christ’. We have had baptism refused at our church until a couple stops living together. They were both taught about repentance and obedience and were later baptized and then later married.

Great. That’s what I was looking for.

So, we respond basically the same way.

Baptism only occurs, when to the best of his ability, the Pastor/Elder determines that a real conversion has taken place and the candidate has a “saving faith” in Christ. I say, “best of his ability”, because sometimes people, especially people reared in a Christian environment, know the “church answers” to the questions the pastor will ask and for some reason deceived and are able to deceive the pastor.

Right.

But, we respond basically the same way. And we call it “conditional” salvation, because we believe God doesn’t grant that salvation unless a person first converts and exhibits the signs of that conversion. In other words, begins to do the will of God.

It seems, you require the same or at least a similar response, but you consider it an unconditional gift.

Does that sound fair?

By the way, we also call it a free gift. But we call it that because God does not have to give it to us. He made a free will promise to do so and is now bound by His promise. But neither our works nor our faith are worth the value of His gift.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

But you denied conditional salvation.

How is saying “salvation is a free gift that can be lost” denying Church teaching? You’re not making sense, are you?

I don’t know what you’re talking about. You said that Ianman’s explanation of salvation was closer to the Council of Trent than mine. Since lanman is preaching unconditional salvation and I’m preaching conditional salvation, you must be denying conditional salvation. Or, if not, then explain how Ianman’s explanation is closer to Trent than mine.

 

[De_Maria]

Well, in the scenario you are giving about scholarships and so forth the person giving the gifts sets the conditions. God’s condition, according the Scriptures, for receiving God’s gifts is faith…

Did we ever agree, that based on this statement, even you believe that God’s gift of salvation is conditional?

 

[lanman87]

Did we ever agree, that based on this statement, even you believe that God’s gift of salvation is conditional?

Honestly, I’ve been flirting with Calvinism. In which even faith is a gift and is given only because of God’s grace and mercy to the elect. But as I’m not ready to drink that kool-aid I will just say that the only condition the Bible gives is faith and all things we do as a follower of Christ come out of that faith.

I will also say that I believe the Sacraments are works of righteousness that the faithful take part in with the purpose of growing and maturing our faith.

THAT is Catholic Teaching.

That is like the third or fourth time I’ve quoted or link to a reformed/calvinist preacher and had someone tell me “That it very Catholic”, or “That is Catholic teaching”. I just find that interesting.

Spurgeon is considered by many to be one of the greatest evangelist and preachers of the 19th Century and he was very Calvinist in his theology.

As I’ve said, I’ve been reading many Calvinist preachers and one thing they all have in common is that faith produces obedience.

John Piper puts it this way

How then does our own obedience — “the obedience of faith” — relate to justification? The answer is: Our obedience is not the ground or the basis of our justification. Nor is it any part of the instrument or means by which we are united to Christ who alone is the ground and the basis of our justification. Faith alone unites us to Christ and Christ alone is the ground of our justification.

Our obedience is the fruit of that faith. The faith that justifies is the kind of faith that, by the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:13), changes us. If your faith in Christ leaves you unchanged, you don’t have saving faith. Obedience — not perfection , but a new direction of thought and affections and behavior — is the fruit that shows that the faith is alive. James put it this way, “So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead” (James 2:17). Faith alone justifies, but the faith that justifies is never alone. It is always accompanied by “newness of life” (Romans 6:4).

Do you believe that it is possible for faith to not result in a “newness of life”?

 

[C.Longinus]

Since lanman is preaching unconditional salvation and I’m preaching conditional salvation, you must be denying conditional salvation.

I added a caveat. Something you continually ignore. Matter of fact, you seem not to have read my quote in its entirety.

If I didn’t make myself clear, I will now. There are NO strings to salvation, only the possibility of losing it if we fail to maintain that gift.

 

[lagerald24]

yours is a dangerous idea indeed, because it suggests that Christ has not overcome sin on our behalf.

Actually, what you assert is false and does not represent the Catholic position on the atonement. We believe that Christ suffered for us but not as us. In other words, we don’t hold to the idea of penal substitutionary atonement, complete with the imputed righteousness and faith alone as most of the Reformed tradition holds. Here is what the Catholic Catechism says:

“The Scriptures had foretold this divine plan of salvation through the putting to death of “the righteous one, my Servant” as a mystery of universal redemption, that is, as the ransom that would free men from the slavery of sin. Citing a confession of faith that he himself had “received”, St. Paul professes that “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures.” In particular Jesus’ redemptive death fulfills Isaiah’s prophecy of the suffering Servant. Indeed Jesus himself explained the meaning of his life and death in the light of God’s suffering Servant. After his Resurrection he gave this interpretation of the Scriptures to the disciples at Emmaus, and then to the apostles.”

And also:

“Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had sinned. But in the redeeming love that always united him to the Father, he assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin, to the point that he could say in our name from the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Having thus established him in solidarity with us sinners, God “did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all”, so that we might be ‘reconciled to God by the death of his Son’.”

 

[De_Maria]

Honestly, I’ve been flirting with Calvinism. In which even faith is a gift and is given only because of God’s grace and mercy to the elect.

I don’t want to add any confusion, but… we believe God offers it to every soul. The only condition is our acceptance. And, I believe you said this before.

But as I’m not ready to drink that kool-aid I will just say that the only condition the Bible gives is faith and all things we do as a follower of Christ come out of that faith.

Ha-ha. I just read what you said below. Yeah, that’s Catholic Teaching. All things we do as a follower of Christ come out of that faith.

I will also say that I believe the Sacraments are works of righteousness that the faithful take part in with the purpose of growing and maturing our faith.

Still not ready to call them works of God, though, huh? But this reminds me of when you brought up the laying on of hands bringing about the grace of the Holy Spirit . We call that the Sacrament of Confirmation.

Acts 8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he of fered them money,

(Oh and also the Sacrament of Holy Orders)

1 Timothy 4:14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

But you do agree, that the laying on of hands will bring about the grace of the Holy Spirit, right?

cont’d