Romans Road: what do I do with it?

[jujubee]

I am looking for a Catholic apologetics response to the Evangelical “Romans Road”. Obviously I am referring to their interpretation of the scripture verses because as a Catholic I believe every word of the bible… just not everything an Evangelical thinks it means.

So where do we agree and where do we disagree with the Romans road to salvation? Links to websites or articles are appreciated also.

 

[Belloc_Fan]

This isn’t perfect, but it’s a start.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=333310

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I am looking for a Catholic apologetics response to the Evangelical “Romans Road”. Obviously I am referring to their interpretation of the scripture verses because as a Catholic I believe every word of the bible… just not everything an Evangelical thinks it means.

So where do we agree and where do we disagree with the Romans road to salvation? Links to websites or articles are appreciated also.

Of course as a Catholic you believe and accept the Written word of God as infallible and inspired (all 72 books), but not accept erroneous interpretations of them.

The Protestant “Roman’s Road” as I see it is incomplete. When traveling this “road” one should get off at the next exit, before hitting the dead-end.

 

[DLClark]

Of course as a Catholic you believe and accept the Written word of God as infallible and inspired (all 72 books), but not accept erroneous interpretations of them.

The Protestant “Roman’s Road” as I see it is incomplete. When traveling this “road” one should get off at the next exit, before hitting the dead-end.

This statement is just not correct. The tack you are referring to is a very good statement about how to be saved. We are saved by faith alone is Christ alone. The reason why I say this is that faith alone in Christ apart from works of any kind of work will save. When we add anything to faith for salvation we dengrate the work of Christ on the cross and the free gift of salvation, Eph 2:8-9, Romans 11:6.

 

[RobNY]

I am looking for a Catholic apologetics response to the Evangelical “Romans Road”. Obviously I am referring to their interpretation of the scripture verses because as a Catholic I believe every word of the bible… just not everything an Evangelical thinks it means.

So where do we agree and where do we disagree with the Romans road to salvation? Links to websites or articles are appreciated also.

I think also, as a practical matter, it doesn’t work. You have to start off by telling someone, or getting them to admit, that they are a sinner. This is increasingly hard among secular people who are losing even a sense of sin.

I would prefer to offer to people the person of Jesus Christ. The Church offers not just a get out of hell free card, but a Person and a way of life which will bring us deep and profound joy and peace.

Until we understand that the Christian way of life is a way of life meant to fulfill our human nature is the most full way, the whole question of sin and hell won’t make any sense, especially to a secularist.

Like Pope Benedict XVI said, Christianity must always seek to propose not to impose. Propose the person of Jesus Christ, propose grace. Show them how beautiful and attractive life with Him is.

But it certainly cannot be reduced to a dialectic.

God bless,
Rob

 

[jujubee]

I do see it as being incomplete, and just exactly what can be presented from scripture in order to refute the false assumptions or complete the sentence is what I am looking for.

I’d like to hear from others about

what are the false assumptions in the Romans Road?

what other scriptures can be presented alongside these particular verses to give a more complete presentation of how we are saved?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

This statement is just not correct. The tack you are referring to is a very good statement about how to be saved. We are saved by faith alone is Christ alone. The reason why I say this is that faith alone in Christ apart from works of any kind of work will save. When we add anything to faith for salvation we dengrate the work of Christ on the cross and the free gift of salvation, Eph 2:8-9, Romans 11:6.

Not correct from a Protestant point of view. However a person stating they believe in Christ and are a sinner may not save them, not if they are capable and able to receive Baptism but reject it.

 

[RobNY]

I do see it as being incomplete, and just exactly what can be presented from scripture in order to refute the false assumptions or complete the sentence is what I am looking for.

I’d like to hear from others about

what are the false assumptions in the Romans Road?

what other scriptures can be presented alongside these particular verses to give a more complete presentation of how we are saved?

Protestants who use Romans Road tend to interpret the moment during the interrogation/discussion when the other person ‘accepts Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior’ as the moment of justification, i.e., they ‘get saved’ at that point.

It’s not so simple as that. The true moment of first justification is at baptism.

God bless,
Rob

 

[allischalmers]

Romans 1; 16 says the gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation. No one comes to Christ without hearing the Gospel first. Because we do not have the strength to come on your own to repentance hearing the gospel is the vehicle that God uses to being us to repentance, it is also the vehicle that God uses to being us to receiving Jesus Christ, John 1 ; 12
There is nothing wrong or missing with the Romans road if it is presented with the whole of scripture.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I am looking for a Catholic apologetics response to the Evangelical “Romans Road”. Obviously I am referring to their interpretation of the scripture verses because as a Catholic I believe every word of the bible… just not everything an Evangelical thinks it means.

So where do we agree and where do we disagree with the Romans road to salvation? Links to websites or articles are appreciated also.

**Baptism Saves You **
By Fr. Dwight Longenecker
catholic.com/thisrock/2008/0803fea2.asp