Salvation

[davidv]

Please tell me specifically, what is a boldfaced lie. If I’m guilty, I’ll apologize. That is a promise.

What you stated in post #202, specifically the underlined part, and I quote:
Nick Jones:

agree. The RCC teaches a humanistic man-centered view of salvation. According to Rome, Jesus doesn’t actually save anyone. He makes salvation POSSIBLE for everyone, but ultimately a person is only saved by using his or her “free” will to make the GOOD choice of accepting Jesus and by their GOOD cooperation with God. And since, according to Rome, we reject God by every mortal sin we commit, we come into grace or walk away from grace by our own goodness or evilness. It is a complete nullification of the biblical conception of FREE GRACE saving sinful mankind. If salvation is granted on the basis of our own worthiness it is certainly NOT FREE.

 

[Nick_Jones]

That the Church teaches (and that we believe) that we can earn our salvation. That we are “good enough” at anything to save ourselves. That the Church teaches that Jesus doesn’t really save us, that we save ourselves. Um, how’s that?

I have never said, or suggested, that the RCC has ever, or would ever, characterize any of its doctrines as teaching “earned” salvation. In fact, Rome does everything it can to deny that it has ever held any such view. But the doctrines of the RCC are NOT COMPATIBLE with free grace, since Rome has clearly stated that grace can be freely accepted or rejected by the individual, and that even after accepting God’s offer of salvation, mankind still rejects this grace by every mortal sin. For Rome, there is “free” grace in name only. By its doctrines, Rome has consistently called “free” what must (in RC theology) be earned by the supposed “goodness” of sinners–a real contradiction in terms.

 

[bookgirl32]

I have never said, or suggested, that the RCC has ever, or would ever, characterize any of its doctrines as teaching “earned” salvation.

As I’ve been saying all along, the RC teaching on salvation is completely humanistic and man-centered. It is EARNED GRACE.

 

[bookgirl32]

And, yes, I know you’re probably going to say that you never suggested that the Church “characterizes” any of it’s doctrines as teaching earned salvation. And you haven’t. And that wasn’t what I said you did. You posted this:

Originally Posted by Nick Jones
If I’ve gotten wrong any detail of the teachings of the Catholic church regarding salvation or grace, please point out where, specifically, I’ve gotten it wrong.

And I told you. Play nice.

 

[bookgirl32]

And again, you didnt’ answer my question about a free gift. They’re giving out free samples of cheese at the grocery store. I don’t want one, so I don’t take one, so I dont’ get any cheese. Is it still free?

 

[guanophore]

Are you saying the the Holy Spirit was not at work in the lives of certain people before the Pentecost?

Isaiah 63:11-14
Then his people recalled the days of old,
the days of Moses and his people—
where is he who brought them through the sea,
with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he who set
his Holy Spirit among them,

12 who sent his glorious arm of power
to be at Moses’ right hand,
who divided the waters before them,
to gain for himself everlasting renown,

13 who led them through the depths?
Like a horse in open country,
they did not stumble

14 like cattle that go down to the plain,
they were given rest by the Spirit of the LORD.
This is how you guided your people
to make for yourself a glorious name.

Not at all, but that is what I understood you to say. You are saying that you were regenerated so that you could see your need for a saviour. Are you saying that this is what was happening the whole time in the OT? What was the purpose of Pentecost?

I have never said, or suggested, that the RCC has ever, or would ever, characterize any of its doctrines as teaching “earned” salvation. In fact, Rome does everything it can to deny that it has ever held any such view. But the doctrines of the RCC are NOT COMPATIBLE with free grace, since Rome has clearly stated that grace can be freely accepted or rejected by the individual, and that even after accepting God’s offer of salvation, mankind still rejects this grace by every mortal sin. For Rome, there is “free” grace in name only. By its doctrines, Rome has consistently called “free” what must (in RC theology) be earned by the supposed “goodness” of sinners–a real contradiction in terms.

The Apostolic Teaching of free will is not “Roman” Nick. This is an offensive term in this context. The Orthodox an the other 22 Rites of the Catholic Church also hold this Teaching from the Apostles. It was held in common for 600 years before the Roman Rite emerged.

Free will has nothing to do with “goodness”. It is God’s gift to mankind. If you think that humans cannot have the ability to choose, please explain the following verses, and what they mean in Calvanist thought. I just cannot figure it out:

Deut 30:19-20
19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live, 20 loving the LORD your God, obeying his voice, and cleaving to him; for that means life to you and length of days,

1 Tim 2:3-4
God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Luke 7:30
30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves,

Why does God appear to offer a choice between life and death?

If God really does not desire all men to be saved, what does this verse mean?

If God really wanted the Pharisees to be saved (as the teaching of Jesus clearly seems to indicate), why did they not go out to be baptized by John? If God wanted them to be damned, then how is it they are rejecting His purpose?

I can make no sense of these passages in the light of your soteriology.

Please answer this also:

And again, you didnt’ answer my question about a free gift. They’re giving out free samples of cheese at the grocery store. I don’t want one, so I don’t take one, so I dont’ get any cheese. Is it still free?

 

[Nick_Jones]

And again, you didnt’ answer my question about a free gift. They’re giving out free samples of cheese at the grocery store. I don’t want one, so I don’t take one, so I dont’ get any cheese. Is it still free?

A free gift that demands some impossible form of cooperation in order to be available or effectual, is useless. As I said before, you’re comparing apples and oranges. Any sinner could want free cheese, but the sinful mind, being hostile to God, cannot want the free gift of salvation. Just try asking John Doe, who says that there is no God, if he wants to pray with you that God will lead him to repentance. Try asking an unconscious person who has just stopped breathing after an accidental O.D. of heroin, if he wants you to begin doing CPR to get him breathing again.

 

[bookgirl32]

As I said before, you’re comparing apples and oranges. Any sinner could want free cheese, but the sinful mind, being hostile to God, cannot want the free gift of salvation. Just try asking John Doe, who says that there is no God, if he wants to pray with you that God will lead him to repentance. Try asking an unconscious person who has just stopped breathing after an accidental O.D. of heroin, if he wants you to begin doing CPR to get him breathing again.

He would not then be able to exercise his free will, so it would not be applicable to our argument. Can you show me, in scripture, where it is stated that sinners, before regeneration, are in the same sort of state as an unconcious person?

 

[bookgirl32]

A free gift that demands some impossible form of cooperation in order to be available is useless.

Okay, but is it still free?

 

[Nick_Jones]

Okay, but is it still free?

Only if “free” means readily available in theory but completely unattainable in practice.

 

[bookgirl32]

Okay, so it’s still free. So, the only thing to clear up here, is not that the Church or us or anyone thinks that it is not free, it’s the question of whether or not we can accept it or reject it. You’re saying that we cannot accept it of our own free will, likening us to the unconcious patient. Can you show me in scripture where you get this?

 

[Nick_Jones]

He would not then be able to exercise his free will, so it would not be applicable to our argument. Can you show me, in scripture, where it is stated that sinners, before regeneration, are in the same sort of state as an unconcious person?

The unregenerate are described as “dead in sin” which is even worse than being unconscious.

Eph. 2:1-10
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

 

[bookgirl32]

The unregenerate are described as “dead in sin” which is even worse than being unconscious.

Eph. 2:1-10
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Okay, I’m editing this: the through faith part, wouldn’t, to be saved by grace through faith, you have to react? You obviously have to have the faith before the grace, right?

And is it possible he is speaking of dead as not unconcious, but as spiritually dead, as in not saved?

 

[guanophore]

A free gift that demands some impossible form of cooperation in order to be available or effectual, is useless. As I said before, you’re comparing apples and oranges. Any sinner could want free cheese, but the sinful mind, being hostile to God, cannot want the free gift of salvation. Just try asking John Doe, who says that there is no God, if he wants to pray with you that God will lead him to repentance. Try asking an unconscious person who has just stopped breathing after an accidental O.D. of heroin, if he wants you to begin doing CPR to get him breathing again.

I think this erroneous conclusion springs from an erroneous foundation. Mankind is hostile to God (kicks against the goads). This does not mean he cannot feel or respond to the goads. Hostility does not equal complete disconnect. As a matter of fact, it is impossible to be hostile toward someone unless you are attached to them.

Actually, ice in groin is better for a heroin overdose.

Even Jesus affirmed that fallen men are able to desire and to do good.

Matt 7:9-12
9 Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? 11 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

In fact, fallen man is able to desire the good, and to choose it.

Only if “free” means readily available in theory but completely unattainable in practice.

I notice you did not respond to the passages I posted indicating that man has free will, and is able to choose “life or death”. Why is that?

 

[Odell]

I notice you did not respond to the passages I posted indicating that man has free will, and is able to choose “life or death”. Why is that?

I hate to be some what of a moderator but you guys have such good responses I have nothing to say.

But I see too how he did not answer your post. Its not like he didnt have time he went strait for bookgirl who posted after you.

Nick what do you have to say for quanophore post?

He speaks for all of us

 

[Nick_Jones]

Okay, so it’s still free.

It is “free” in the same way that the offer of CPR is “free” to the unconscious and dead (no longer breathing) person who CANNOT ACCEPT the “free” offer of CPR to get him breathing again.

 

[Nick_Jones]

Okay, I’m editing this: the through faith part, wouldn’t, to be saved by grace through faith, you have to react?

How can a dead body react or respond, to become saved by grace through faith? Wouldn’t the dead person need to be regenerated (brought to life) before any response in faith is possible?

You obviously have to have the faith before the grace, right?

I believe that the spiritually dead need God’s grace of regeneration in order to see their need for the Savior. God’s grace is what makes faith happen.

And is it possible he is speaking of dead as not unconcious, but as spiritually dead, as in not saved?

Yes. The spiritually dead cannot embrace the faith that saves because they will not. They are hostile toward God and their hearts are hardened against Him.

 

[bookgirl32]

How can a dead body react or respond, to become saved by grace through faith? Wouldn’t the dead person need to be regenerated (brought to life) before any response in faith is possible?

Um, sorry, it doesn’t say dead body.

As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.

dead in your transgressions and sins, not spiritually dead.

I believe that the spiritually dead need God’s grace of regeneration in order to see their need for the Savior. God’s grace is what makes faith happen.

Yes. The spiritually dead cannot embrace the faith that saves because they will not. They are hostile toward God and their hearts are hardened against Him.

Please resond to guanaphore’s point about being hostile to God. To be hostile to God, you have to be in at least some sort of relationship with Him, correct? By your definition of dead, you can’t be dead and hostile at the same time.

I’m still glad we’ve got that point about free gifts though, if it’s free it’s free, you’ve affirmed that. Your objection is to the reaction to the free gift, and not to the nature of the gift itself. So we can can clear that up about the Church nullifying God’s grace then.

 

[Odell]

I’m still glad we’ve got that point about free gifts though, if it’s free it’s free, you’ve affirmed that. Your objection is to the reaction to the free gift, and not to the nature of the gift itself. So we can can clear that up about the Church nullifying God’s grace then.

 

[bookgirl32]

Um, sorry, it doesn’t say dead body.

As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.

dead in your transgressions and sins, not spiritually dead.

Please resond to guanaphore’s point about being hostile to God. To be hostile to God, you have to be in at least some sort of relationship with Him, correct? By your definition of dead, you can’t be dead and hostile at the same time.

I’m still glad we’ve got that point about free gifts though, if it’s free it’s free, you’ve affirmed that. Your objection is to the reaction to the free gift, and not to the nature of the gift itself. So we can can clear that up about the Church nullifying God’s grace then.

Whoops, I meant not physically dead, BUT spiritually dead.