K
kotes19
Guest
Friends~ I could use some apologetics here. Below is a long email (sorry so long) from a Protestant who’s accusing me, a Catholic, of taking Scripture out of context. I told her that was her specialty, not mine. Anyhow… please take a look and help me out w/ the RCC teachings/views on this. Thanks a bunch! Half is here, half on a new posting:
Let us look into the surrounding context, then. Titus 3:4-7:
But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
When the entire sentence is read, one must wonder where the argument holds ground in the first place. For in the text, several things are certain:
God is the subject. He is doing the saving (v. 5)
God’s mercy is given as the motivation for the action
There is an explicit denial of human activity, as he has not saved us by works done in righteousness
The agency of the salvation is not of human origin, as both washing of regeneration and renewal have the Holy Spirit as the source
The means by which we received the Holy Spirit upon us was Jesus
So, one has to wonder the basis upon which the Catholic feels justified to argue that baptism done by human accomplishes spiritual regeneration.
Titus 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,
It is important to note that at no point in this sentence are humans mentioned, nor is human activity ever the subject or means of any verb. But, humans are the objects of the main verb in this clause. He saved us. In looking into this passage, observing these things is important:
Who saved? God saved.
Saved whom? God saved us.
Why did he save? Because of his mercy.
By what means did he save? By the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Spirit.
We observe from the very outset that human activity is explicitly denied in this passage. Certainly, if baptism were in view, we would see some reference to at least our obedience (if, perhaps someone wishes to separate obedience from an act of righteousness). There would at least be some reference to our activity. There is not, however. The phrase translated above as, “not on the basis of deeds” is a negation of human works.
To further separate the work of salvation from human effort, Paul uses a strong adversative (grk. alla). Thus, a strong contrast is given here. It is not on the basis of works (not just any works, but those done in righteousness) but it is on the basis of his mercy. Thus, God was not motivated to save because of a work of man, even those deeds that are righteous (of which baptism is certainly one), but because of his mercy. Even still, baptism is not listed as a parallel activity, since the “washing” is not given as a separate function from the Holy Spirit.
The meaning if this passage is that in every respect, we are saved by God, and not by any action on our part. It is entirely unilateral here. Therefore, even if a person baptized another, and regeneration happened at the same time, one could not say that the baptism performed in anyway resulted in regeneration. Otherwise, the meaning of the passage would be on its head, and the motivation for God to save would, indeed, be a work done in righteousness. If, truly, “all our righteousness is as filthy rags”, then even the greatest of our deeds does not merit eternal life. Surely, one could never make the case that anything less, or anything other than a righteous deed would be worthy of merit. But, Paul denies even the righteous deeds.
“Washing”= the Greek term Loutron.The idea of the word is a ritual cleansing, rather than simply a cleansing from dirt, though that meaning is there. The practice of ritual cleansing before service is not at all uncommon, as this was the rite the sons of Aaron were required to practice. Thus, many have gone through great lengths to somehow tie rituals of cleansing to loutron in this context. But, this is an example of what is often called “one-word exegesis”. This is another way of saying that the people are practicing eisegesis, or reading into the text their assumptions. Let me explain. A single word with no context has no meaning, since it has no defining parameters to limit its meaning.
Let us look into the surrounding context, then. Titus 3:4-7:
But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
When the entire sentence is read, one must wonder where the argument holds ground in the first place. For in the text, several things are certain:
God is the subject. He is doing the saving (v. 5)
God’s mercy is given as the motivation for the action
There is an explicit denial of human activity, as he has not saved us by works done in righteousness
The agency of the salvation is not of human origin, as both washing of regeneration and renewal have the Holy Spirit as the source
The means by which we received the Holy Spirit upon us was Jesus
So, one has to wonder the basis upon which the Catholic feels justified to argue that baptism done by human accomplishes spiritual regeneration.
Titus 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,
It is important to note that at no point in this sentence are humans mentioned, nor is human activity ever the subject or means of any verb. But, humans are the objects of the main verb in this clause. He saved us. In looking into this passage, observing these things is important:
Who saved? God saved.
Saved whom? God saved us.
Why did he save? Because of his mercy.
By what means did he save? By the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Spirit.
We observe from the very outset that human activity is explicitly denied in this passage. Certainly, if baptism were in view, we would see some reference to at least our obedience (if, perhaps someone wishes to separate obedience from an act of righteousness). There would at least be some reference to our activity. There is not, however. The phrase translated above as, “not on the basis of deeds” is a negation of human works.
To further separate the work of salvation from human effort, Paul uses a strong adversative (grk. alla). Thus, a strong contrast is given here. It is not on the basis of works (not just any works, but those done in righteousness) but it is on the basis of his mercy. Thus, God was not motivated to save because of a work of man, even those deeds that are righteous (of which baptism is certainly one), but because of his mercy. Even still, baptism is not listed as a parallel activity, since the “washing” is not given as a separate function from the Holy Spirit.
The meaning if this passage is that in every respect, we are saved by God, and not by any action on our part. It is entirely unilateral here. Therefore, even if a person baptized another, and regeneration happened at the same time, one could not say that the baptism performed in anyway resulted in regeneration. Otherwise, the meaning of the passage would be on its head, and the motivation for God to save would, indeed, be a work done in righteousness. If, truly, “all our righteousness is as filthy rags”, then even the greatest of our deeds does not merit eternal life. Surely, one could never make the case that anything less, or anything other than a righteous deed would be worthy of merit. But, Paul denies even the righteous deeds.
“Washing”= the Greek term Loutron.The idea of the word is a ritual cleansing, rather than simply a cleansing from dirt, though that meaning is there. The practice of ritual cleansing before service is not at all uncommon, as this was the rite the sons of Aaron were required to practice. Thus, many have gone through great lengths to somehow tie rituals of cleansing to loutron in this context. But, this is an example of what is often called “one-word exegesis”. This is another way of saying that the people are practicing eisegesis, or reading into the text their assumptions. Let me explain. A single word with no context has no meaning, since it has no defining parameters to limit its meaning.