Salvation Outside the Catholic Church

[Theodore_Jones]

“Truth often generates hatred because it (truth) exposes falsehoods” and that it does do.
“For it is not those who, just, hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous by God.” Rom. 2:13 Doesn’t it?

 

[Amandil]

“Truth often generates hatred because it (truth) exposes falsehoods” and that it does do.
“For it is not those who, just, hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous by God.” Rom. 2:13 Doesn’t it?

Argument ad-nauseum. Its already been refuted. Repeating it doesn’t make your belief any more true in light of the myriad of Scripture which contradicts your false interpretation.

The fact is that your twisting Paul’s words into a meaning which he never taught and which are directly contradicted by other letters from Paul’s own mind.

Your interpretation was never held by any orthodox Christian of Paul’s day, it is nothing but a novelty of your own invention by your twisting of Paul’s words. Nothing more.

You choose to reject Christ by rejecting the Church, that’s your decision. But lets stop pretending that you’re following the Bible but rather your own false “gospel”.

 

[Theodore_Jones]

Argument ad-nauseum. Its already been refuted. Repeating it doesn’t make your belief any more true in light of the myriad of Scripture which contradicts your false interpretation.

The fact is that your twisting Paul’s words into a meaning which he never taught and which are directly contradicted by other letters from Paul’s own mind.

Your interpretation was never held by any orthodox Christian of Paul’s day, it is nothing but a novelty of your own invention by your twisting of Paul’s words. Nothing more.

You choose to reject Christ by rejecting the Church, that’s your decision. But lets stop pretending that you’re following the Bible but rather your own false “gospel”.

The Scripture does not contradict itself. I did not make the statement of Rom. 2:13 nor any of the texts that support Paul’s soteriological directive nor any other statement found in the scriptures. As for as churches I’m not a member of any of them.
As for twisting what the apostle Paul has said PROVE IT BUSTER and I dare you to try.

 

[Amandil]

The Scripture does not contradict itself.

I never said that the Scriptures contradict itself. I said that your beliefs are contradicted by Scripture.

I did not make the statement of Rom. 2:13

No you didn’t. But your are distorting its meaning to suit your preconceived soteriological bent by wrenching it out of its context and twisting it to mean what you want it to rather than what he meant.

…nor any of the texts that support Paul’s soteriological directive nor any other statement found in the scriptures.

If what you mean by “Paul’s soteriological directive” you really mean “my soteriology”
or that your soteriology has some correspondence or identity with the Bible then you are in fact begging the question and arguing in a circle.

You haven’t even demonstrated that your soteriology is true. You have provided a single verse of Scripture wrenched out of context that you say means what you want it to mean.

You haven’t shown any correlation with anything Christ taught or any evidence that your soteriology is consistent with the whole of Scripture or Church History. No evidence from the writings of early Christians that bears witness to the continuation of your soteriology which you falsely attribute to Paul.

As for as churches I’m not a member of any of them.

That much is obvious. Thus in that alone you violate Scripture and thus disobey Christ.

As for twisting what the apostle Paul has said PROVE IT BUSTER and I dare you to try.

That’s all I’ve been doing. Where have you been?

 

[Lion_Heart]

“Truth often generates hatred because it (truth) exposes falsehoods” and that it does do.
“For it is not those who, just, hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous by God.” Rom. 2:13 Doesn’t it?

Greetings in Christ Theodore Jones,

The Church official interpretation of Romans 2:6-13 – 3:28.
SACRA PAGINA ROMANS By Brendan Byrne, S.J.
Daniel J. Harrington, S.J., Editor

Brendan Byrne, S.J., is professor of New Testament at Jesuit Theological College, within the United Faculty of Theology, Parkville, Melbourne Australia. … Pope John Paul II named him a member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1990.

Quote: “Paul fully embraces the principle of justification according to one’s works.
Acceptance of the Christian gospel has indeed led him to fully convinced that IN FACT NO HUMAN BEING WILL FIND JUSTIFICATION ON THE BASIS OF WORKS and that, faced with total human unrighteousness, God has graciously effected in Christ an alternative mode of justification for those who believe (Rom.3:21-26).

For the purpose of the prophetic accusation and echoing what has already been stated in vv 6-7 and 10, he envisages at least the possibility of justification on the basis of performance

– though VERY SOON (Rom.3:19-20, 23) he will DENY that this possibility, at least as CONVENTIONALLY understood, could be realized in fact ” End quote. Emphasize mine.

Performance the criterion of justification (Rom.2:6-13) VS. Faith the criterion of justification Rom. (3:19-20, 23-24, 28). …

As we see above, context is very important. Paul is contrasting the old conventional way of work salvation which cannot save VS. with the salvation by faith of the New Covenant, which is THE only way of salvation.

If we take Rom.2:6-13 OUT OF CONTEXT, we can be DECEIVED and to believe, “Faith + Works = Salvation” (half new + half old), which is THE greatest heresy in Christianity. – Reward: Condemnation, (Gal.1:6-9).

HOW TO READ THE NEW TESTAMENT By Etienne Charpentier

Nihil obstate: Father Anton Cowan
Imprimatur: Monsignor John Crowley, VG Westminster, 28 May 1985

Quote: “There is ONE CENTRAL QUESTION here: how can we become righteous and be SAVED?

We are NOT justified by what we do (works, observing law) but by FAITH IN CHRIST.” End quote. Emphasize mine.

CONDITIONS THAT OUR WORKS COUNT FOR ANYTHING
The Catholic Church clearly teaches that one MUST be in a STATE OF GRACE, MUST be a member of the BODY OF CHRIST, MUST be already SAVED, MUST be already JUSTIFIED before we do a SINGLE WORK that counts for anything.

Further conditions MUST BE PRESENT to make SUPERNATURAL merit possible.

“The meritorious work must be morally good, that is, in accordance with the moral law in its object, intent, and circumstances.

It MUST be done FREELY, WITHOUT any EXTERNAL COERCION or INTERNAL NECESSITY.

It MUST be SUPERNATURAL, that is, AROUSED and ACCOMPANIED by ACTUAL GRACE, and proceeding from a SUPERNATURAL motive.

Strictly speaking only a person in the STATE OF GRACE can merit, as defined by the Church.” (Denzinger 1576, 1582)

JUSTIFICATION IN CATHOLIC TEACHING by Jimmy Akin
“The essence of supernatural love is unselfishness—doing something NOT BECAUSE IT WILL HELP US SOMEHOW, but because we want to do it out of SHEER LOVE for the other person, whether that person is God or one of our fellow human beings out of the love of God.

This is THE ONLY KIND of love that ultimately pleases God and therefore the ONLY KIND that ultimately gets us a reward IN heaven.” End quote. Emphasis mine.

Our works is count only, if it is the fruits of our salvation, done for the GLORY OF GOD, done FREELY, WITHOUT any EXTERNAL COERCION or INTERNAL NECESSITY, and WITHOUT our interests.

With love in Christ,
LH.

 

[Sirach2]

“Truth often generates hatred because it (truth) exposes falsehoods” and that it does do.
“For it is not those who, just, hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous by God.” Rom. 2:13 Doesn’t it?

This argument is really circular, endless and fruitless, since you are unwilling to listen to what is presented, but cling to your own rationalization. TJ, I noted that you do not belong to a church, so it suggests you ascribe to sola scriptura, your own private interpretations. You have come to a Catholic forum and strive to teach Catholics what they should believe, according to your private study of scripture.

What you fail to understand is that Catholics, while they are always encouraged to prayerfully study scripture, entrust the authentic interpretation to our Magisterium, as set forth in Dei Verbum [Ch. II, 10] from Vatican II Council.

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.

I don’t understand what you are trying to say about the law, for you say it is not the Sinai law; i.e., that which was given to Moses. We know that to be the ten commandments, which Jesus said He did not come to abolish, but to fulfill the law. We still have a moral obligation not to kill, covet, steal, lie, etc. Nothing has changed. So what is it you are referring to? Natural law, as is written in the heart of every man? Yes, Romans 2:14-16 refers to that. What are you arguing? Justification by works; i.e., keeping the commandments? If so, you are incomplete in your understanding of Romans chapter 4.

Catholics believe we are justified by both faith AND works. James 2:14. This has been a protestant bone of contention for over 500 years, the endless debate formed from lack of true understanding and teaching from many outside of our faith… If you came here to nitpick our faith and tell us what we should believe, you will fail every time, for we submit, not to man, but to our Church’s solid infallible teaching. You are best advised to abandon ship.

 

[Theodore_Jones]

Greetings in Christ Theodore Jones,

The Church official interpretation of Romans 2:6-13 – 3:28.
SACRA PAGINA ROMANS By Brendan Byrne, S.J.
Daniel J. Harrington, S.J., Editor

Brendan Byrne, S.J., is professor of New Testament at Jesuit Theological College, within the United Faculty of Theology, Parkville, Melbourne Australia. … Pope John Paul II named him a member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1990.

Quote: “Paul fully embraces the principle of justification according to one’s works.
Acceptance of the Christian gospel has indeed led him to fully convinced that IN FACT NO HUMAN BEING WILL FIND JUSTIFICATION ON THE BASIS OF WORKS and that, faced with total human unrighteousness, God has graciously effected in Christ an alternative mode of justification for those who believe (Rom.3:21-26).

For the purpose of the prophetic accusation and echoing what has already been stated in vv 6-7 and 10, he envisages at least the possibility of justification on the basis of performance

– though VERY SOON (Rom.3:19-20, 23) he will DENY that this possibility, at least as CONVENTIONALLY understood, could be realized in fact ” End quote. Emphasize mine.

Performance the criterion of justification (Rom.2:6-13) VS. Faith the criterion of justification Rom. (3:19-20, 23-24, 28). …

As we see above, context is very important. Paul is contrasting the old conventional way of work salvation which cannot save VS. with the salvation by faith of the New Covenant, which is THE only way of salvation.

If we take Rom.2:6-13 OUT OF CONTEXT, we can be DECEIVED and to believe, “Faith + Works = Salvation” (half new + half old), which is THE greatest heresy in Christianity. – Reward: Condemnation, (Gal.1:6-9).

HOW TO READ THE NEW TESTAMENT By Etienne Charpentier

Nihil obstate: Father Anton Cowan
Imprimatur: Monsignor John Crowley, VG Westminster, 28 May 1985

Quote: “There is ONE CENTRAL QUESTION here: how can we become righteous and be SAVED?

We are NOT justified by what we do (works, observing law) but by FAITH IN CHRIST.” End quote. Emphasize mine.

CONDITIONS THAT OUR WORKS COUNT FOR ANYTHING
The Catholic Church clearly teaches that one MUST be in a STATE OF GRACE, MUST be a member of the BODY OF CHRIST, MUST be already SAVED, MUST be already JUSTIFIED before we do a SINGLE WORK that counts for anything.

Further conditions MUST BE PRESENT to make SUPERNATURAL merit possible.

“The meritorious work must be morally good, that is, in accordance with the moral law in its object, intent, and circumstances.

It MUST be done FREELY, WITHOUT any EXTERNAL COERCION or INTERNAL NECESSITY.

It MUST be SUPERNATURAL, that is, AROUSED and ACCOMPANIED by ACTUAL GRACE, and proceeding from a SUPERNATURAL motive.

Strictly speaking only a person in the STATE OF GRACE can merit, as defined by the Church.” (Denzinger 1576, 1582)

JUSTIFICATION IN CATHOLIC TEACHING by Jimmy Akin
“The essence of supernatural love is unselfishness—doing something NOT BECAUSE IT WILL HELP US SOMEHOW, but because we want to do it out of SHEER LOVE for the other person, whether that person is God or one of our fellow human beings out of the love of God.

This is THE ONLY KIND of love that ultimately pleases God and therefore the ONLY KIND that ultimately gets us a reward IN heaven.” End quote. Emphasis mine.

Our works is count only, if it is the fruits of our salvation, done for the GLORY OF GOD, done FREELY, WITHOUT any EXTERNAL COERCION or INTERNAL NECESSITY, and WITHOUT our interests.

With love in Christ,
LH.

I’ll stipulate that I am fully aware of the soteriological assumption the RCC teaches and every other so called “Christian” church’s soteriological assumption. However other than these assumptions being poppycock they have no other classification. If I’m not mistaken Paul’s letter, Romans, was written to your church(es).
You have cited Rom. 3:19&20 to defend your convoluted soteriological assumption. So then Paul contradicts himself between Rom. 2:13 & 3:19&20? No! No person will ever interpret Romans correctly unless he is guided to the understanding of which code of law Paul is referencing whenever the word law was used in one of his statements. Rom. 3:19&20 is only referencing the Sinai code, but the word law in Rom. 2:13 is not. It is true that no one will be declared righteous by God by observing the Sinai code which is why it was changed after the ascension of Jesus Christ. And even though Heb. 7:12 directly states the there was a change made to the law written on stone you contest that it is not true. Doesn’t the Lord himself clearly state that there are only a very few that ever figure out what what the small narrow door that must first be used to enter the kingdom of God actually is? And you even contest Him thinking it is extremely wise.

 

[Theodore_Jones]

This argument is really circular, endless and fruitless, since you are unwilling to listen to what is presented, but cling to your own rationalization. TJ, I noted that you do not belong to a church, so it suggests you ascribe to sola scriptura, your own private interpretations. You have come to a Catholic forum and strive to teach Catholics what they should believe, according to your private study of scripture.

What you fail to understand is that Catholics, while they are always encouraged to prayerfully study scripture, entrust the authentic interpretation to our Magisterium, as set forth in Dei Verbum [Ch. II, 10] from Vatican II Council.

I don’t understand what you are trying to say about the law, for you say it is not the Sinai law; i.e., that which was given to Moses. We know that to be the ten commandments, which Jesus said He did not come to abolish, but to fulfill the law. We still have a moral obligation not to kill, covet, steal, lie, etc. Nothing has changed. So what is it you are referring to? Natural law, as is written in the heart of every man? Yes, Romans 2:14-16 refers to that. What are you arguing? Justification by works; i.e., keeping the commandments? If so, you are incomplete in your understanding of Romans chapter 4.

Catholics believe we are justified by both faith AND works. James 2:14. This has been a protestant bone of contention for over 500 years, the endless debate formed from lack of true understanding and teaching from many outside of our faith… If you came here to nitpick our faith and tell us what we should believe, you will fail every time, for we submit, not to man, but to our Church’s solid infallible teaching. You are best advised to abandon ship.

I am fully aware of what any Catholic believes. However Rom. 2:14-16 is NOT referencing the Sinai code of law and neither is 12&13. Wasn’t it Paul’s objective by paying a shackled visit to your church(es) to impart some spiritual gift? The spiritual gift of interpretation did not stick. You need to follow your own advice. For the fruit that has come from your cloistered closets is only indicative that the tree is bad.

 

[Theodore_Jones]

I never said that the Scriptures contradict itself. I said that your beliefs are contradicted by Scripture.

No you didn’t. But your are distorting its meaning to suit your preconceived soteriological bent by wrenching it out of its context and twisting it to mean what you want it to rather than what he meant.

If what you mean by “Paul’s soteriological directive” you really mean “my soteriology”
or that your soteriology has some correspondence or identity with the Bible then you are in fact begging the question and arguing in a circle.

You haven’t even demonstrated that your soteriology is true. You have provided a single verse of Scripture wrenched out of context that you say means what you want it to mean.

You haven’t shown any correlation with anything Christ taught or any evidence that your soteriology is consistent with the whole of Scripture or Church History. No evidence from the writings of early Christians that bears witness to the continuation of your soteriology which you falsely attribute to Paul.

That much is obvious. Thus in that alone you violate Scripture and thus disobey Christ.

That’s all I’ve been doing. Where have you been?

All you’ve done so far is make an allegation. Ecclesiastical opinion cannot trump what is written. “Do not go beyond what is written.” 1 Cor. 4:6

 

[St_Redemption]

James, thanks for your reply. Doesn’t this person have some duty, however, to search for truth and perhaps re-visit the Church’s teachings, etc.? I ask this question because I myself experienced leaving the Church for the better part of a decade – only to return home. It seems the Church has lost so many in similar circumstances – poor catechesis followed by a luring to the emotional connection found in the non-denominational realm, and the ostensible beauty of the “simple Gospel message uncluttered by 2000 years of barnacles.” Your answer, which I am sure is well-studied, seems rather liberal in scope. I guess at the heart of it is what is meant by “no fault of one’s own.” Thanks again and God Bless.

Not everybody who does a heartfelt and honest search for the truth ends up deciding to be Catholic.

 

[Theodore_Jones]

This argument is really circular, endless and fruitless, since you are unwilling to listen to what is presented, but cling to your own rationalization. TJ, I noted that you do not belong to a church, so it suggests you ascribe to sola scriptura, your own private interpretations. You have come to a Catholic forum and strive to teach Catholics what they should believe, according to your private study of scripture.

What you fail to understand is that Catholics, while they are always encouraged to prayerfully study scripture, entrust the authentic interpretation to our Magisterium, as set forth in Dei Verbum [Ch. II, 10] from Vatican II Council.

I don’t understand what you are trying to say about the law, for you say it is not the Sinai law; i.e., that which was given to Moses. We know that to be the ten commandments, which Jesus said He did not come to abolish, but to fulfill the law. We still have a moral obligation not to kill, covet, steal, lie, etc. Nothing has changed. So what is it you are referring to? Natural law, as is written in the heart of every man? Yes, Romans 2:14-16 refers to that. What are you arguing? Justification by works; i.e., keeping the commandments? If so, you are incomplete in your understanding of Romans chapter 4.

Catholics believe we are justified by both faith AND works. James 2:14. This has been a protestant bone of contention for over 500 years, the endless debate formed from lack of true understanding and teaching from many outside of our faith… If you came here to nitpick our faith and tell us what we should believe, you will fail every time, for we submit, not to man, but to our Church’s solid infallible teaching. You are best advised to abandon ship.

The law was fulfilled by making an addition to it after all of the written code was disobeyed by murdering Jesus Christ. “The law was added so that the (singular) trespass might increase.” Rom 5:20, becoming the one sin that has been made unilaterally accountable for each man too.
“And for Your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting, I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man.” Gen. 9:5 NIV The murder of Jesus Christ has only perfected the Way for God to demand an account from each man in regard to the sin of his only begotten son’s murder. There are no exceptions as his Magisterium has ruled by law for each man.

 

[Sirach2]

TJ, my post fell on deaf ears, as I suspected it would.

Bye - no more talking!

 

[Theodore_Jones]

TJ, my post fell on deaf ears, as I suspected it would.

Bye - no more talking!

Didn’t hear anything. Read your convoluted defense that goes beyond what is written which the scripture by design refutes.

 

[Sirach2]

Surely you know there are 34,000 denominations world-wide and all of them, like you, profess to hold the Truth and correct interpretation of scripture. And we should listen to you … why? :doh2:
Praise be to God who has not left us orphans, but graciously provided Catholics with a Living, Divine Authority who will infallibly teach in His name.

I suspect your time on this forum is limited.

 

[Theodore_Jones]

Surely you know there are 34,000 denominations world-wide and all of them, like you, profess to hold the Truth and correct interpretation of scripture. And we should listen to you … why? :doh2:
Praise be to God who has not left us orphans, but graciously provided Catholics with a Living, Divine Authority who will infallibly teach in His name.

I suspect your time on this forum is limited.

You are either ignorant of or are ignoring the numbers problem. According to the Lord thy God there are only a very few that ever find out what the door into God’s kingdom actually is.
34,000 denominations is not a wise defense, friend, for it puts what He says to the question. My time is limited. In not many months I’ll be at seventy years. As to a limited time on this forum it is normal for anyone who dares tell the truth about Jesus crucifixion. For it is only them who get thrown out of the places where religion is taught. The Lord warned about a particular false soteriological conjecture. Now. Just what do you think you have faith in? “It is a good idea for one man to die, be murdered, and save me?”

 

[Amandil]

This whole exercise with T.J. is a perfect example of why sola-scriptura is a false doctrine. In this case since he in his pride refuses to submit to the Church he then twists the meaning of Scripture and makes himself the pope of his own “church” instead.

2 Peter 1: 20 “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation…”

 

[mdcpensive1]

This whole exercise with T.J. is a perfect example of why sola-scriptura is a false doctrine. In this case since he in his pride refuses to submit to the Church he then twists the meaning of Scripture and makes himself the pope of his own “church” instead.

2 Peter 1: 20 “First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation…”

I wonder if he believes in 1Tim 3:15 where the Church is the foundation and not his opinion?

 

[Amandil]

I wonder if he believes in 1Tim 3:15 where the Church is the foundation and not his opinion?

Already showed him that verse, it must not be a part of his bible.

Apparently he’s got the whole of scripture either blacked out or torn out save a handful of verses.

 

[mdcpensive1]

Already showed him that verse, it must not be a part of his bible.

Apparently he’s got the whole of scripture either blacked out or torn out save a handful of verses.

Seems like he has a lot in common with the Pharaoh of Egypt.

 

[acseawell]

Personally, I believe we should leave their eternal Salvation to God.

“Not everyone who says, ‘yes’ to God does His will” (even Catholics are subject to rejecting Gods will!)
Jesus

Those who leave the fullness of the Church Communion (Eucharist) are NOT necessarily leaving a saving faith. I agree this is a troubling aspect of our (protestant Christianity) Church, but we MUST be happy for those who genuinely believe Jesus is our savior, and have turned from sin. Just because they may hold to degrees of heretical beliefs, does not mean they have apostacized!

Remember, the Lord also said, “…And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.”

This tells me that they may ‘see’ some Teachings as from men, because men have not shown them the fruits of these Teachings (bad Catholics who say yes to God, but do not do His will)But they still find the Spirit of Jesus in other, more foundational ways, as being the Holy Spirit of God.

Peace
Michael

No one EVER leaves the Catholic Church. Baptism leaves and indelible mark on the soul that can never be “erased”