So I'm curious some denominations teach that "accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior" and you will be saved?

[benhur]

Thanks for the reply and explanation. I appreciate it.

The added “God picks” was part of a question, how does God pick those He regenerates? It seems the answer as you put it, is God’s foreknowledge. God knows who will allow Him to bend that person’s free will. God searches the minds of the people, and these are the ones God will regenerate in order that they will have faith.

So, regeneration precedes faith. Regeneration, or salvation, comes first, followed by faith. Do I have it right?

However, this creates a problem for those who say we are saved by faith. Evangelicals talk of a “saving faith.” That is, faith is what saves us. But you seem to be saying we are saved before we have faith. Which is the reverse of an evangelical’s salvation by faith alone, that is, we are saved, or regenerated, as a result of our having faith: we are born again because we have faith.

The bolded part above, what is that a quote from?

What others seem to be saying is that we have faith, believe, before we are born again or regenerated. I am saying if you have faith, believe, you are born again. It is like if you are born you breathe, and I am not discerning which comes first, for they seem to be simultaneous. So no, it is not like you are born again and for a while have no faith…my main point is that faith is an expression ,resides in, the new inner man and is a result of being born in the spirit…it is not like I have faith, believe then days or hours or months later am water baptized to be born again, born of the spirit, where all things become new. No, all things became new when I first saw, when I first believed, that which I did not see, did not believe. My profession of faith in Christ before baptism is evidence of new birth…before the rite.

 

[Porknpie]

The CC teaching that we are saved by faith and works I do not accept. We are saved by faith and faith alone… This is not the true Gospel as taught by Jesus and the apostles as recorded in the pages of Scripture.

no this is a man made doctrine invented in the reformation. Faith and works are the apostolic teachings. Faith and works are biblical. The written Word of God can not be any clearer: saved by works, not by faith alone. The Word of God can not contradict itself. Of faith, hope and love, the greatest of these is love. If all we needed for our salvation was faith, faith would be the greatest! Faith without works is dead. Show me where in scripture it says a dead faith can save. It does not.

The thought that I can be in a state of grace one minute, commit a mortal sin so I am no longer in a state of grace, I have a heart attach the next minute and go straight to hell?

yes there are sins that result in death. This is also the apostolic teaching and scripture. Another great reason to be Catholic is that we have all seven sacraments, including the Annointing of the Sick. Jesus gave us the means to his grace for our salvation.

This is not the true Gospel as taught by Jesus and the apostles as recorded in the pages of Scripture.

the true gospel that you speak of only became apparent in the reformation? Somehow, you propose that Christianity was led astray from the time of the apostles as we see writings of the Church holding to faith and works, way before there was a biblical canon.

Which sets up a Protestant dilemma: the Church that established the canon of scripture is the same Church whose teachings you reject including the means of salvation. Either one trusts scripture on Christ’s words that he would lead his Church to all truth or one does not. If you reject the Church teachings on salvation, then likewise, you need to question whether it’s books are truly inspired and inerrant.

For the Church can not be infallible on one and fallible on the other.

:nope:

 

[ltwin]

Huh? You mean someone who disbelieves and thinks the gospel is all baloney will go ahead and get baptized anyway? One would think they would walk away shaking their heads.
Therefore, this remark about history and human nature doesn’t make sense.

Well, I’m sorry that human history and human nature doesn’t make sense to you. Let me make it simpler:

This book makes use of newly available archival sources to reexamine the Roman Catholic Church’s policy, from the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries, of coercing the Jews of Rome into converting to Christianity. Marina Caffiero, one of the first historians permitted access to important archives, sets individual stories of denunciation, betrayal, pleading, and conflict into historical context to highlight the Church’s actions and the Jewish response. Caffiero documents the regularity with which Jews were abducted from the Roman ghetto and pressured to accept baptism. She analyzes why some Jewish men, interested in gaining a business advantage, were more inclined to accept conversion than the women. The book exposes the complexity of relations between the papacy and the Jews, revealing the Church not as a monolithic entity, but as a network of competing institutions, and affirming the Roman Jews as active agents of resistance.

Except that it does. Water, by its very nature, when you are in it, will wash you whether you like it or not.

Are we still talking about water? I thought we were talking about regeneration.

I don’t know of Catholics who defend coerced baptism. And do I detect a hint of sarcasm in your remarks?

No sarcasm. I’m deathly serious. Also, I am not saying that there are Catholics today who would support coerced baptism. What I am saying is that in the past Catholics did support the practice, and even if they did not support the practice, they contributed to a rationalization of the practice in many ways.

“To treat baptism of insincere people…” I don’t understand this remark. Of course insincere people should not be baptized–no one is saying that they should be. However, God knows who is insincere, and I imagine it does grieve the Holy Spirit.

OK. So what happens to those people. Are they washed of their sins? Are they born again? Have they, in baptism, died and risen to new life in Christ?

It seems to me that in saying that they have (which it seems to be the Catholic position must say that they have, but perhaps Catholic theologians have a way around this?), a mockery is made out of sacrament instituted by Christ.

 

[Jon_S_1]

On the surface it may appear that Evangelicals and Catholics agree on the issue of justification generally but in reality nothing could possibly further from the truth. The issue of justification is what has divided us for over 400 hundred years. The CC confuses justification with sanctification. Justification is not an ongoing process it is a one time event that we contribute absolutely nothing to. Justification is by faith alone through grace alone by the finished work of atonement accomplished by Jesus alone. Justification and our salvation is a free gift of God that we contribute nothing to…all the glory goes to God. Am I saying that our works don’t matter? No way! This is sanctification. Sanctification is an on going process for anyone who has truly been justified. Sanctification is growing in holiness, becoming more Christlike, an on going process until we die. I don’t desire to be pleasing to God because I fear punishment or Hell but because I love Him so much and I realize I am not even capable of loving Him at all if if not moved by the Spirit. The CC teaching that we are saved by faith and works I do not accept. We are saved by faith and faith alone. The thought that I can be in a state of grace one minute, commit a mortal sin so I am no longer in a state of grace, I have a heart attach the next minute and go straight to hell? This is not the true Gospel as taught by Jesus and the apostles as recorded in the pages of Scripture. The issue of justification is what has divided Catholics and Evangelicals for over 400 hundred years and continues to divide us today.

Justification = faith and works

Verses

Justification by faith alone.

Ed

I guess this would lead me to ask you a couple questions. (Your response seems very baptist FYI)

1. In your view what is the point of sanctification? If you are once and done saved and justified , the only point of sanctification is what? After all you are fully justified already and could not be anymore pleasing to God?
2. If I accept Christ and get active in church for a few years, growing in holiness etc… Then I decide, it’s all lies and I reject all of it and end up becoming a drug dealer who murders ten people among a host of other sinful things. Am I saved? I was already justified right?

 

[ltwin]

So, regeneration precedes faith. Regeneration, or salvation, comes first, followed by faith. Do I have it right?

However, this creates a problem for those who say we are saved by faith. Evangelicals talk of a “saving faith.” That is, faith is what saves us. But you seem to be saying we are saved before we have faith. Which is the reverse of an evangelical’s salvation by faith alone, that is, we are saved, or regenerated, as a result of our having faith: we are born again because we have faith.

Actually, Reformed Christians would say that regeneration makes faith possible. Unless God , by his Spirit, regenerates us, it is impossible to have faith.

You’re highlighting a difference in soteriology between evangelicals on the Reformed side versus those evangelicals on the Arminian side of the theological spectrum. One side emphasizes God’s sovereignty in salvation while the other side emphasizes man’s cooperation.

As an Arminian, I would say that we are enabled to have faith and repent of our sins by the power of the Holy Spirit. This then brings us from spiritual death to life in Christ.

 

[benhur]

Actually, Reformed Christians would say that regeneration makes faith possible. Unless God , by his Spirit, regenerates us, it is impossible to have faith.

You’re highlighting a difference in soteriology between evangelicals on the Reformed side versus those evangelicals on the Arminian side of the theological spectrum. One side emphasizes God’s sovereignty in salvation while the other side emphasizes man’s cooperation.

As an Arminian, I would say that we are enabled to have faith and repent of our sins by the power of the Holy Spirit. This then brings us from spiritual death to life in Christ.

Good answer…I think i arminian but lately am becoming convinced of full depravity,and but am not full blown calvinist. Still hard to see the difference between, " regeneration making faith possible" and " empowered by Holy Spirit to have faith,bringing us to new life". Have been trying to say no man is justified in the flesh or flesh can not have saving faith,that is flesh having a dead spirit. I have also tried to ,differentiate between the Holy Spirit convicting the flesh/ dead spirit and actually regenerating with new life and faith. Another words can one with a dead spirit have saving justifying faith OT and NT ? Is regeneration, born again, born of the spirit the same thing in OT,NT. Not withstanding the in dwelling and baptizing,empowering dispensation differences? See if we say OT saints were not regenerated,born again, born of the spirit, then we are saying they had faith with a dead spirit,without new birth and then Nt saints also believe before baptismal regeneration new birth …see the connection or posible problem? I have always understood OT saints to have been born of the spirit, by grace as evidenced by faith, even though not indwelt by hs. My final point would be that Jesus seemed to chide nicodemus for not understanding this new birth even though he was a leader while still under OT,before Jesus was even on the scene. Either nicodemus should have known it as OT fact of regeneration or he was to know the prophecy of Jeremiah of the nt type of regeneration,where HS would I dwell and write law on our heart…I think it is the former…appreciate your thoughts…

 

[Faithdancer]

They worked their salvation in fear and trembling, and taught others how to do the same in Christ.

Most Protestants also believe in the process of sanctification; not as a “work” but as an irresistable call for those who have come to faith in Jesus Christ. Justification precedes sanctification, but the two are inseparable. I think that justification + sanctification are quintessentially Trinitarian. The former is instantaneous, God’s grace extended to the sinner who accepts Christ. The latter is processual, the response of the believer to the inward working of the Holy Spirit.

I don’t hold to the belief that once one has accepted Christ as Lord and Savior, one can sin ad liberum. Rather, if one has truly accepted Christ, one will want to become more holy. Further, one doesn’t repent, get saved, and then never repent again. Repentance is rather continuous because all will continue to sin. In that regard, I don’t see much difference with Catholic views on reconciliation, except for the sacerdotal element and the concomitant parsing of sins into “mortal” and “venial.”

 

[Jon_S_1]

Most Protestants also believe in the process of sanctification; not as a “work” but as an irresistable call for those who have come to faith in Jesus Christ. Justification precedes sanctification, but the two are inseparable.
I don’t hold to the belief that once one has accepted Christ as Lord and Savior, one can sin ad liberum. Rather, if one has truly accepted Christ, one will be want to become more holy. Further, one doesn’t repent, get saved, and then never repent again. Repentance is rather continuous because all will continue to sin. In that regard, I don’t see much difference with Catholic views on reconciliation, except for the sacerdotal element and the concomitant parsing of sins into “mortal” and “venial.”

Thanks for your insight! I agree our positions are far more similar than different in most evangelical circles.

Where does “fear and trembling” work into your ideas of justification?

 

[Faithdancer]

Thanks for your insight! I agree our positions are far more similar than different in most evangelical circles.

Where does “fear and trembling” work into your ideas of justification?

Hey Jon, I was just editing my previous post when you responded to it. Oh well, didn’t change much, just tried to clarify.

“Fear and trembling?” Can I respond literally? Fear of the omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient God, in whose presence I am less than a mote. And trembling…I tremble at the thought that God would be merciful even to me…an abject sinner. God, whom I’ve offended countless times, ignored countless times, thought I knew better than, countless times, and whom I will no doubt offend, ignore, and think I know better than, again (but hopefully less and less, with the help of the Holy Spirit). Wow!

 

[benhur]

I guess this would lead me to ask you a couple questions. (Your response seems very baptist FYI)

1. In your view what is the point of sanctification? If you are once and done saved and justified , the only point of sanctification is what? After all you are fully justified already and could not be anymore pleasing to God?
2. If I accept Christ and get active in church for a few years, growing in holiness etc… Then I decide, it’s all lies and I reject all of it and end up becoming a drug dealer who murders ten people among a host of other sinful things. Am I saved? I was already justified right?

Are you trying to say gods love is dependent on what you do to please him,that is even let’s say after your salvation or confirmation ? Does he love some more than others ? Then if you sin does he love you less? Does he love the chief of sinners the least…the mosaic covenant was quite conditional but where we today ? Is he a respector of persons,he respects better more righteous people more? That is the more righteous you are the more he loves you?
See justification gives you a son and you will always love him .sanctification is like the pleasures you receive as he lives out his life according to gods purposes…I find it perplexing that some think it humble to have conditional salvation assurance in an unconditional righteous church while others have an unconditional salvation assurance in a conditional righteous church. Another words why can’t you have as much faith in The Lord preserving you as you do Him preserving the Church? Why should others have more assurance,even OSAS, even though they don’ t see their church as infallible ?..I suppose what we really are trusting in at the beginning is what we will trust in at the middle and at the end of our spiritual pilgrimage.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Hey Jon, I was just editing my previous post when you responded to it. Oh well, didn’t change much, just tried to clarify.

“Fear and trembling?” Can I respond literally? Fear of the omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient God, in whose presence I am less than a mote. And trembling…I tremble at the thought that God would be merciful even to me…an abject sinner. God, whom I’ve offended countless times, ignored countless times, thought I knew better than, countless times, and whom I will know doubt offend, ignore, and think I know better than, again. Wow!

Interesting, but I feel that does great injustice to the text. If you look at the context of philipians 2, it is an exhortation to Christian living;

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Couple this with Paul saying

6 For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. 7 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; 8 in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing. (2 Timothy 4)

And James 2; “show me your faith without deeds and I will show you my faith by my deeds”

All this seems to indicate that the Christian life is a process. Not a moment. Catholics would hold we are saved by faith and manifest in baptism. If we never commit a serious sin, we remain saved, but if WE choose to harm our relationship with God and are unrepentant about it, then he allows us to separate ourselves from him. He is always waiting for our return though.

This equates to a process of humble submission to God , where we truly set ourselves aside to pursue God and his will.

Salvation lies in such actions. In “selling all you have” to follow Jesus.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Are you trying to say gods love is dependent on what you do to please him,that is even let’s say after your salvation or confirmation ? Does he love some more than others ? Then if you sin does he love you less? Does he love the chief of sinners the least…the mosaic covenant was quite conditional but where we today ? Is he a respector of persons,he respects better more righteous people more? That is the more righteous you are the more he loves you?
See justification gives you a son and you will always love him .sanctification is like the pleasures you receive as he lives out his life according to gods purposes…I find it perplexing that some think it humble to have conditional salvation assurance in an unconditional righteous church while others have an unconditional salvation assurance in a conditional righteous church. Another words why can’t you have as much faith in The Lord preserving you as you do Him preserving the Church? Why should others have more assurance,even OSAS, even though they don’ t see their church as infallible ?..I suppose what we really are trusting in at the beginning is what we will trust in at the middle and at the end of our spiritual pilgrimage.

See my post responding to faith dancer. I think it should clear up your large misunderstandings.

 

[Faithdancer]

Interesting, but I feel that does great injustice to the text. If you look at the context of philipians 2, it is an exhortation to Christian living;

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Couple this with Paul saying

6 For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. 7 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; 8 in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing. (2 Timothy 4)

And James 2; “show me your faith without deeds and I will show you my faith by my deeds”

All this seems to indicate that the Christian life is a process. Not a moment. Catholics would hold we are saved by faith and manifest in baptism. If we never commit a serious sin, we remain saved, but if WE choose to harm our relationship with God and are unrepentant about it, then he allows us to separate ourselves from him. He is always waiting for our return though.

This equates to a process of humble submission to God , where we truly set ourselves aside to pursue God and his will.

Salvation lies in such actions. In “selling all you have” to follow Jesus.

But of course Christian life is a process, Jon. If you thought I implied otherwise, I fear that you misunderstood me. The “moment” is justification, when the decision for Christ is made. But the process is sanctification. I submit that the understanding of sanctification is virtually the same for Catholics and Protestants alike- or should be. I don’t take “work out your salvation with fear and trembling” to mean that one can’t be sure of salvation because of uncertainty over one’s works being good enough. There is only one “action” that is required for salvation, and that is active belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. All subsequent actions are works. That’s not to say works are not necessary, but they are part of the process of sanctification, not justification and they are signs of salvation, not causes of salvation

 

[Jon_S_1]

But of course Christian life is a process, Jon. If you thought I implied otherwise, I fear that you misunderstood me. The “moment” is justification, when the decision for Christ is made. But the process is sanctification. I submit that the understanding of sanctification is virtually the same for Catholics and Protestants alike- or should be. I don’t take “work out your salvation with fear and trembling” to mean that one can’t be sure of salvation because of uncertainty over one’s works being good enough. There is only one “action” that is required for salvation, and that is active belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. All subsequent actions are works. That’s not to say works are not necessary, but they are part of the process of sanctification, not justification and they are signs of salvation, not causes of salvation

Of course we affirm that we should not be working for our salvation and hope we did enough. That’s not what we believe. I think we do also have different definitions for justification.

So I will erase the terms at state it this way , which I hope you can affirm.

Christians are given a gift of salvation that is because of Christ and through Christ. Apart from Christ and his sacrifice there is no salvation.

Christians accept this gift by faith.

Faith is a living thing which results in life change and transformation.

Upon accepting Christ’s gift (for us in baptism) one is saved and no world are necessary to merit salvation. It is Christ’s gift.

If we turn out back on Christ and reject his gift by sinning greatly we lose our salvation by our own choice. Repentance is necessary to reconcile with God and continue in holiness.

 

[Holly3278]

There are a lot of different Protestant denominations which teach this false doctrine. I know the Southern Baptists teach it. I was raised Southern Baptist and I actually did “accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior” when I was around 12. It wasn’t until 2005 that I learned about Catholicism and then became Catholic the following year in 2006.

There really is no Biblical basis whatsoever for this false doctrine. I think they rely on the Protestant Reformation principle of “sola fide” or “faith alone” for this false doctrine. However, salvation by faith alone is demonstrably false in numerous places in the Bible.

 

[SoMissCatholic]

Read the first 5 chapters of Romans. Could Paul possibly be more clear. And what about James? Does he contradict Paul? Is it possible for the Bible to contradict itself? No. What is James really saying about justification?

Ed

If Paul is so clear in Romans regarding salvation by faith alone, what do you make of Romans 2:5-8?

By your stubbornness and impenitent heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, who will repay everyone according to his works: eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness.

(Romans 2:5-8 NABRE)

It would seem to me that that passage poses quite a stumbling block to the doctrine of sola fide.

 

[SoMissCatholic]

Good answer…I think i arminian but lately am becoming convinced of full depravity,and but am not full blown calvinist. Still hard to see the difference between, " regeneration making faith possible" and " empowered by Holy Spirit to have faith,bringing us to new life". Have been trying to say no man is justified in the flesh or flesh can not have saving faith,that is flesh having a dead spirit. I have also tried to ,differentiate between the Holy Spirit convicting the flesh/ dead spirit and actually regenerating with new life and faith. Another words can one with a dead spirit have saving justifying faith OT and NT ? Is regeneration, born again, born of the spirit the same thing in OT,NT. Not withstanding the in dwelling and baptizing,empowering dispensation differences? See if we say OT saints were not regenerated,born again, born of the spirit, then we are saying they had faith with a dead spirit,without new birth and then Nt saints also believe before baptismal regeneration new birth …see the connection or posible problem? I have always understood OT saints to have been born of the spirit, by grace as evidenced by faith, even though not indwelt by hs. My final point would be that Jesus seemed to chide nicodemus for not understanding this new birth even though he was a leader while still under OT,before Jesus was even on the scene. Either nicodemus should have known it as OT fact of regeneration or he was to know the prophecy of Jeremiah of the nt type of regeneration,where HS would I dwell and write law on our heart…I think it is the former…appreciate your thoughts…

I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on Tim Staples’ critique of the doctrine of total depravity.

 

[benhur]

See my post responding to faith dancer. I think it should clear up your large misunderstandings.

Ok thanks .Totally agrre on the pilgrimage ,and call to holy living. While at one end one may take the beginning and rest on it and not continue one can also continue resting on the flesh to be good or our assurance resting on what we do . Don’t know, something about assurance and what sin does and doesn’t do comes between us.

 

[stewstew03]

On the surface it may appear that Evangelicals and Catholics agree on the issue of justification generally but in reality nothing could possibly further from the truth. The issue of justification is what has divided us for over 400 hundred years. The CC confuses justification with sanctification. Justification is not an ongoing process it is a one time event that we contribute absolutely nothing to. Justification is by faith alone through grace alone by the finished work of atonement accomplished by Jesus alone. Justification and our salvation is a free gift of God that we contribute nothing to…all the glory goes to God. Am I saying that our works don’t matter? No way! This is sanctification. Sanctification is an on going process for anyone who has truly been justified. Sanctification is growing in holiness, becoming more Christlike, an on going process until we die. I don’t desire to be pleasing to God because I fear punishment or Hell but because I love Him so much and I realize I am not even capable of loving Him at all if if not moved by the Spirit. The CC teaching that we are saved by faith and works I do not accept. We are saved by faith and faith alone. The thought that I can be in a state of grace one minute, commit a mortal sin so I am no longer in a state of grace, I have a heart attach the next minute and go straight to hell? This is not the true Gospel as taught by Jesus and the apostles as recorded in the pages of Scripture. The issue of justification is what has divided Catholics and Evangelicals for over 400 hundred years and continues to divide us today.

Justification = faith and works

Verses

Justification by faith alone.

Ed

Hi Ed - welcome to CAF. Please cite the Catechism of the Catholic Church (or CCC) when describing what Catholics believe. In this case, I request that you please cite the CCC on justification; specifically where it says we contribute to our justification.

Thanks!

 

[edkw55]

Hi Ed - welcome to CAF. Please cite the Catechism of the Catholic Church (or CCC) when describing what Catholics believe. In this case, I request that you please cite the CCC on justification; specifically where it says we contribute to our justification.

Thanks!

Hi,

I’ve read through the CCC a few times as well as a fair amount of books written by Catholics on Catholicism as well as 6 months of RCIA so I have a decent understanding of CC teaching on justification. Don’t feel the need to cite anything though…just expressing my beliefs.

Ed