Someone can lose their salvation?

[qui_est_ce]

There was nothing personally unloving at all in paul c’s post. He simply made accruate observations. I find it surprising that **your need for affection apparently outweighs your desire to know the truth. **

You put into words what bothered me about Seeker’s protests. He found no wrong with his mischaracterization of the CC on a Catholic Apologetics thread, yet felt personally attacked when we corrected him with the facts.

Here are the false accusations of Seeker:

-Catholics teach a different Gospel
-Catholics added books to the Bible
-Catholics teach a works salvation

He refused to address the many scriptural passages supporting the teachings of the CC:

I really cannot respond to all the passages you cited because I see something much different than you do, but if you want to kist a few at a time; I will address them.

Yet he accused us of refusing to dialog.

I have to believe he he has never been exposed to the true teachings of the CC.

 

[moondweller]

It takes a lot of courage for you to admit this, and I am proud of you for doing it. Please disregard my previous demand that you demonstrate where salvation by works is taught by the Church.

It’s taught but it’s not admitted. You people constantly teach it on this thread (especially you), but you don’t admit it. There’s a difference.

you are correct here. Catholics believe that it is God’s grace that justifies us. The Apostles taught that we access this grace through obedient faith.

Say it right, guanophore. You say “initially” justifies. And you always say “God’s grace” but not that God Himself justifies. But Scripture states that God Himself justifies the one who has faith in Christ (Rom.3:26, 30), not through works but “through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 3:24) and totally apart from works - period:Rom 4:6 "just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:"You, OTOH, teach multiple justifications based on works. We’ve discussed this at length.

The Apostles never separate saving faith from the good works produced by it.

Oh please guanophore, STOP IT! Read my quote above and then my previous post where I point out the contextual difference between Eph 2:8-9 and Eph. 2:10.

The only thing that matters is faith, working through love.

But it’s not the love that saves, it’s faith and the Object of it. Love is the fruit of the Spirit who indwells the believer who has now been cleansed and purged of ALL sins because of the once for all sacrificial work of Jesus Christ.

What does that mean to you, Moon? when you read this does it read “Catholics, work their way into grace so they can be converted”?

“Converted” is the key word. “Converted” to a Catholic doesn’t mean saved, only a hope to be saved in the future, and that based on meritorious works.

Catholics believe that the nature of sin does not change “this side of the cross”. sin separates people from God.

Thus rendering the cross (Christ’s accomplished redemptive work on it) insignificant.

When we are in a state of sin, we cannot accomplish the works that God has created beforehand that we should walk in them.

Say it right, guanophore, that you should merit eternal life by them.

Right. That is why it says “No one can merit the initial grace which is at the origin of conversion.” It is a free gift of God.Paul teaches this because Paul is Catholic.

“Initial,” that’s the key word. Everything subsequent to “initial” (which is non-Scriptural, uniquely Catholic) is merited by subsequent works

Indeed! And all such faith will demonstrate itself in works, which is why the Apostle says "show me your faith, and I will show you my works. Saving faith is never separated from the works produced by it.

But it’s not the works that save or justify. It’s the faith. ALWAYS the faith.Rom 4:5 "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,

I would posit two caveats. One is that righteousness is infused, not just imparted.

Your “caveat” is not Scriptural. It’s not taught in Scripture that righteousness is “infused,” but is gifted. Justification is the gifting of divine righteousness on the basis of faithRom 3:22-24 "…even {the} righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction (between Jew and Gentile); for all sinned and fall short of the glory of God being justified as a gift by His grace (how? through works? NO!) through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;

The other is that faith is never alone. Faith is how we access the grace that justifies us, and it is always accompanied by hope and love.

According to Paul faith is how the justified access this grace “in which we STAND” (Rom. 5:1-2).

what is a wonder to me is that you seem to be intractibly refusing to accept Catholic Teaching on this.

Because as a believer I accept God’s teachings preserved in Holy Writ.

Scripture is also extremely clear on why one would “advocate works”. It was one of Jesus’ favorite topics!

Actually, Christ’s favorite topic was believing in Him for eternal life. Clearly taught in the Gospel account of John.

You yourself would also advocate works. You just place them under the category of sanctification, where your beliefs are rather consistent with the catholic teaching.

Except it’s the saved who are sanctified through faith in Christ alone. And I am inconsistent with Catholic teaching because I agree with Paul who writes:Eph 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, the gift of God; not as a result of works,"Catholic soteriology departed from this basic Biblical truth many years ago. You’re trying so hard to get back to it, guanophore.

 

[Saint2B]

For your position to work, that those saved cannot fall, you have to use the words of the Bible in a very awkward way that contradicts how the word is defined. That doesn’t make sense.

For example, take the use of “remain”. Look up this definition of remain: thefreedictionary.com/remain. It means to stay in the same state or place.

A person cannot “remain” where he or she has not been.

This is not a bit theological term, like justification. It is simple, common, and straightforward.

Here are some pertinent uses in the New Testament:

Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. (John 6:56).

Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me. (John 15:4)

"I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. (John 15:5)

If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. (John 15:6)
– Jesus doesn’t say those not remaining with him were not branches at all, He says they were branches, and will now be cast into the fire because they did not remain (or stay in the state of faith in Him).

If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love. (John 15:10)

When he arrived and saw the evidence of the grace of God, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts. (Acts 11:23)
– in this last passage, “remain true to the Lord with all their hearts” strengthens the concept remaining or being in the body of Christ, as it shows that “remaining true” is an expression of showing total fidelity with faith in Jesus.

… strengthening the disciples and encouraging them to remain true to the faith. (Acts 14:22)
True to the faith? That can’t be other than remaining faithful to something they believed in.

But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch (acts 15:35)
I included this one to show how remain is used. It definitely meant to stay in a place, even back then. The word meaning has not changed.

Here is a link with all the other times “remain” is used in the New Testament. It always means that someone was in a place or state already.

biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=remain&version1=31&searchtype=all&spanbegin=47&spanend=73

Here is another phrase used to show that someone had belief in Christ, and now can fall:
"For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgement,

It says there is “no longer remains” etc. This meant there used to be a state where there was a sacrifice for sins. That can only happen for that person if they were saved (in your words), or believed.

The concept of OSAS only holds when the words of Scripture are taken out of normal meaning and bent to the dogma, and not the other way around, that the dogma should be realized from the words of Scripture (which is the way it should be done). Protestant theology came as a “reaction” to what Martin Luther and others saw first as abuses of the Church. It was not developed during a time of exploring God’s grace.

All the pieces of it have to lock together for any of it to hold. This means that, when faced with contradictory evidence from Scripture, the meaning of those passages has to be changed to fit. This is not good. Further proof of this is that each Protestant group twists it a bit differently. For example, some say you cannot fall, others that those who fall were never believers. This lack of consistency arising from the same time period and belief show a weakness there.

 

[Saint2B]

Remember that Jesus conquered death. Yet, the saved still physically die. In the same way, even though Jesus conquered sin (of which death entered the world through Adam and Eve’s sin), we are still faced with resisting sin.

In an OSAS world, what is sin after a person is saved? Clearly those claiming to be saved commit it. (Think preachers who commit adultery, etc.)

Does this mean that NO ONE is saved, because any saved person cannot sin, yet all do?

After all, it is now gone, as Jesus obliterated it once, for all, right? For OSAS, it should not occur in the life of a saved person. Or else, saved people have free reign to pillage, as they are covered, right?

 

[qui_est_ce]

For your position to work, that those saved cannot fall, you have to use the words of the Bible in a very awkward way that contradicts how the word is defined. That doesn’t make sense.

For example, take the use of “remain”. Look up this definition of remain: thefreedictionary.com/remain. It means to stay in the same state or place.

A person cannot “remain” where he or she has not been.

This is not a bit theological term, like justification. It is simple, common, and straightforward.

{SNIP}

Here is a link with all the other times “remain” is used in the New Testament. It always means that someone was in a place or state already.

biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=remain&version1=31&searchtype=all&spanbegin=47&spanend=73

Here is another phrase used to show that someone had belief in Christ, and now can fall:
"For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgement,

It says there is “no longer remains” etc. This meant there used to be a state where there was a sacrifice for sins. That can only happen for that person if they were saved (in your words), or believed.

The concept of OSAS only holds when the words of Scripture are taken out of normal meaning and bent to the dogma, and not the other way around, that the dogma should be realized from the words of Scripture (which is the way it should be done). Protestant theology came as a “reaction” to what Martin Luther and others saw first as abuses of the Church. It was not developed during a time of exploring God’s grace.

All the pieces of it have to lock together for any of it to hold. This means that, when faced with contradictory evidence from Scripture, the meaning of those passages has to be changed to fit. This is not good. Further proof of this is that each Protestant group twists it a bit differently. For example, some say you cannot fall, others that those who fall were never believers. This lack of consistency arising from the same time period and belief show a weakness there.

You need to remain here!

 

[ncgolf]

In an OSAS world, what is sin after a person is saved? Clearly those claiming to be saved commit it. (Think preachers who commit adultery, etc.)

I have asked this many times … and typically there is no response or that if they sin seriously they were never a true believer to begin with.

The difficulty in this theology is reconciling sin (the reason Jesus had to suffer).

Why does one who has received this grace still sin?

 

[Howie01]

I have asked this many times … and typically there is no response or that if they sin seriously they were never a true believer to begin with.

The difficulty in this theology is reconciling sin (the reason Jesus had to suffer).

Why does one who has received this grace still sin?

Rom 7:19-23

 

[ncgolf]

Rom 7:19-23

Explain how this works in reconiling sin or the sinful nature to guaranteed eternal salvation. It sure seems a struggle with Paul.

 

[Howie01]

ncgolf:

Explain how this works in reconiling sin or the sinful nature to guaranteed eternal salvation.

Forgiveness in Christ.

ncgolf:

It sure seems a struggle with Paul.

Life is a struggle, less so for the redeemed, but a struggle nevertheless.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Forgiveness in Christ.

Is this forgiveness for all, or only for those who believe in Christ?

Life is a struggle, less so for the redeemed, but a struggle nevertheless.

How do you define struggle? Certainly the martyrs paid a worldly high price for their faith. I would like to say I have a complete trust in God. But I struggle with truly letting Him take charge of my young adult children who seem to constantly make wrong decisions.

 

[Howie01]

Is this forgiveness for all, or only for those who believe in Christ?

Yes. (the latter)
qui est ce:

How do you define struggle?

The context of my response to ncgolf was the struggle of the Christian, in this life, with sin (cf Rom 7:19ff).

 

[moondweller]

Remember that Jesus conquered death. Yet, the saved still physically die.

Have you not read the words of Christ to those who BELIEVE?John 11:25-26 "Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?"Do you, "Saint2B"?

Saint2B, huh? Well, have you ever noticed that true believers are already addressed as “saints” (Rom. 1:7; 8:27; 15:25; 1 Cor. 1:2; 14:33; 2 Cor. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Phil. 1:1, etc., etc.). That’s because they’ve been saved, declared righteous because of their faith in Christ, and possess eternal life. The true believer is a saint now and forevermore.

In the same way, even though Jesus conquered sin (of which death entered the world through Adam and Eve’s sin), we are still faced with resisting sin.

The believer is to resist sin but not FOR redemption. Redemption and the forgiveness of sins is through the shed blood of Jesus Christ, once for all (Acts 10:43; 13;38; Col. 1:14). This is what the cross is about. It’s not a religious emblem. God actually accomplished something there.

Your problem is that you don’t understand the cross and what Christ accomplished there on sinful man’s behalf. And even if you were told, I wonder if you’d believe it.

In an OSAS world, what is sin after a person is saved? Clearly those claiming to be saved commit it. (Think preachers who commit adultery, etc.)

Does this mean that NO ONE is saved, because any saved person cannot sin, yet all do?

What makes you think a saved person cannot sin? This was covered here.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Moondweller,

I am not entirely sure at what point you expect to be taken seriously. The following paragraph can be summarized as: even though the facts do not support what I have been saying - and, I admit this - I am going to continue to say this anyway. (And, really, you have to get the name of the organization right just as a starter. It is the Catholic Church [CC] there are is Roman in it… so, honestly, RCC is simply incorrect.)

Does the RCC come right out and specifically state in clear language that its devotees are saved by works? Of course not.

What you appear to be trying to do is to maintain your established criticism - with no pretense of having done any research - and then contorting doctrine from the CC to fit your canned criticism. Surely, this approach even cries out to you as being both lazy and shallow.

But, when the RCC negates justification by faith alone, it necessarily implies that you must do something for justification, for if it is not by faith alone, then it must be by faith and something other than faith. And this is made obviously true on this thread because ALL of you advocate for the necessity of works for your own future salvation.

Most of the posters have brought to your attention that there is NO REFERENCE that supports Faith Alone. When you seem to wander off is that all of us agree that Faith is necessary - something like some one telling a person that they must find the door before they can put the key in the lock before they can turn the handle and then push it open. None of this will happen if you do not find the door first. But, how strange for some one to have found the door and then insist that they need do nothing more to get to the other side. Now, to keep with this analogy - please understand that God’s Grace is there in helping us find the door in the first place - nothing would get done without the free (un-merited) givt of God’s Love. All of the other acts require God’s Grace, too - there is nothing (from start to finish) that does not require His Grace. But, it just does not end there - we are required to respond…just like the servants who went out and invested the money and made their Master more money (as opposed to the '…wicked and lazy servant…" who buried his Master’s money.

According to St. James, Faith without Works is Dead Faith. This is the take home message and there is no waltzing around it.

Though the RCC won’t come right out and say it, you very well know what it implies. But here are a couple of its official teachings:2027 “No one can merit the initial grace which is at the origin of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life, as well as necessary temporal goods.”

You know, the criticism you gave here remineded me of Gospel story of Jesus curing the woman with a hemorrhage (Matt 9:20-22). A very dramatic story - here is Jesus surrounded by a large crowd going to perform a healing when this woman - with Faith in Jesus - approaches Him to touch His garments (that would be a Work - her actually DOING something.) She just did not sit on the edge of the crowd and rest on her Faith. Here is the story:

**A woman suffering hemorrhages for twelve years came up behind him and touched the tassel on his cloak.
21
She said to herself, “If only I can touch his cloak, I shall be cured.”
22
Jesus turned around and saw her, and said, “Courage, daughter! Your faith has saved you.” And from that hour the woman was cured. **

Now, here you go again… trying to put St. Paul in opposition to the recorded words of Christ. Don’t forget - old Arbrham gathered up his son and everything else he needed to make the sacrifice of Issac that God had commanded. Surely, going all the way to even raising the knife would be seen as his Faith moving him to Work at doing God’s will. Abraham just did not sit back at the campsite and tell his son about the need to have Faith - and then NOT DO THE WORKS OF GOD.

Do you recall St. Paul telling us about the importance of Faith, Hope and Charity - but, Chairty is the one that will last. This is the item that takes us for the ‘theory’ of Christianity to the actual practice of what God has called us (and given us the Grace) to do.

“We can therefore hope in the glory of heaven promised by God to those who love him and do his will. In every circumstance, each one of us should hope, with the grace of God, to persevere ‘to the end’ and to obtain the joy of heaven, as God’s eternal reward for the good works accomplished with the grace of Christ” (CCC, par. 1821).But Paul clearly teaches:

Rom 4:2-5 "For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it (his belief/faith) was credited to him (by God) as righteousness.
​

Try a little harder. If you admit - as you did - that that the CC is not teaching that we can work our way to heaven - but, rather to have Faith that enlivens our Work to please God by DOING His Will - I’d say you have made some progress.

God bless​

 

[broski234]

Hi, Moondweller,

I am not entirely sure at what point you expect to be taken seriously. The following paragraph can be summarized as: even though the facts do not support what I have been saying - and, I admit this - I am going to continue to say this anyway. (And, really, you have to get the name of the organization right just as a starter. It is the Catholic Church [CC] there are is Roman in it… so, honestly, RCC is simply incorrect.)

What you appear to be trying to do is to maintain your established criticism - with no pretense of having done any research - and then contorting doctrine from the CC to fit your canned criticism. Surely, this approach even cries out to you as being both lazy and shallow.

Most of the posters have brought to your attention that there is NO REFERENCE that supports Faith Alone. When you seem to wander off is that all of us agree that Faith is necessary - something like some one telling a person that they must find the door before they can put the key in the lock before they can turn the handle and then push it open. None of this will happen if you do not find the door first. But, how strange for some one to have found the door and then insist that they need do nothing more to get to the other side. Now, to keep with this analogy - please understand that God’s Grace is there in helping us find the door in the first place - nothing would get done without the free (un-merited) givt of God’s Love. All of the other acts require God’s Grace, too - there is nothing (from start to finish) that does not require His Grace. But, it just does not end there - we are required to respond…just like the servants who went out and invested the money and made their Master more money (as opposed to the '…wicked and lazy servant…" who buried his Master’s money.

According to St. James, Faith without Works is Dead Faith. This is the take home message and there is no waltzing around it.

You know, the criticism you gave here remineded me of Gospel story of Jesus curing the woman with a hemorrhage (Matt 9:20-22). A very dramatic story - here is Jesus surrounded by a large crowd going to perform a healing when this woman - with Faith in Jesus - approaches Him to touch His garments (that would be a Work - her actually DOING something.) She just did not sit on the edge of the crowd and rest on her Faith. Here is the story:

**A woman suffering hemorrhages for twelve years came up behind him and touched the tassel on his cloak.
21
She said to herself, “If only I can touch his cloak, I shall be cured.”
22
Jesus turned around and saw her, and said, “Courage, daughter! Your faith has saved you.” And from that hour the woman was cured. **

Now, here you go again… trying to put St. Paul in opposition to the recorded words of Christ. Don’t forget - old Arbrham gathered up his son and everything else he needed to make the sacrifice of Issac that God had commanded. Surely, going all the way to even raising the knife would be seen as his Faith moving him to Work at doing God’s will. Abraham just did not sit back at the campsite and tell his son about the need to have Faith - and then NOT DO THE WORKS OF GOD.

Do you recall St. Paul telling us about the importance of Faith, Hope and Charity - but, Chairty is the one that will last. This is the item that takes us for the ‘theory’ of Christianity to the actual practice of what God has called us (and given us the Grace) to do.

Try a little harder. If you admit - as you did - that that the CC is not teaching that we can work our way to heaven - but, rather to have Faith that enlivens our Work to please God by DOING His Will - I’d say you have made some progress.

God bless

Good Post Tom!

 

[moondweller]

(And, really, you have to get the name of the organization right just as a starter. It is the Catholic Church [CC] there are is Roman in it… so, honestly, RCC is simply incorrect.)

Well, depends on whom you’re talking to. The Eastern Orthodox surely consider themselves “Catholic,” but not “Roman.” And Protestants consider themselves part of the “Catholic” (universal) church Christ is now building: The Apostles its foundation, Christ Himself its corner stone (Eph. 2:20-22). I think you need to study Church history and learn how these differentiations developed.

Most of the posters have brought to your attention that there is NO REFERENCE that supports Faith Alone. When you seem to wander off is that all of us agree that Faith is necessary - something like some one telling a person that they must find the door before they can put the key in the lock before they can turn the handle and then push it open. None of this will happen if you do not find the door first.

Oh but I have, my dear friend. I’ve entered It through faith alone and am saved forevermore. Jesus said:John 10:9 “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.”

But, how strange for some one to have found the door and then insist that they need do nothing more to get to the other side.

There is no other side. When one enters through Christ (by faith alone) you’re in, you’re saved, you find pasture. IOW, contented sheep.

Abraham just did not sit back at the campsite and tell his son about the need to have Faith - and then NOT DO THE WORKS OF GOD.

I’ll let the Holy Spirit answer you through His inspired Word:Rom 4:1-6 "What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it (his faith) was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

Do you recall St. Paul telling us about the importance of Faith, Hope and Charity - but, Chairty is the one that will last. This is the item that takes us for the ‘theory’ of Christianity to the actual practice of what God has called us (and given us the Grace) to do.

True. But it’s “by GRACE through FAITH” that one “has been saved…not as a result of works” (Eph. 2:8-9).

Try a little harder. If you admit - as you did - that that the CC is not teaching that we can work our way to heaven - but, rather to have Faith that enlivens our Work to please God by DOING His Will - I’d say you have made some progress.

Actually I said it teaches it but won’t admit it. In fact your post verifies it. You perfectly well understand that in RC’ism grace through faith is not the means by which one is saved, but grace, faith and works. The problem is, the latter cancels out the former two. What you’re left with is works.

 

[broski234]

Well, depends on whom you’re talking to. The Eastern Orthodox surely consider themselves “Catholic,” but not “Roman.” And Protestants consider themselves part of the “Catholic” (universal) church Christ is now building: The Apostles its foundation, Christ Himself its corner stone (Eph. 2:20-22). I think you need to study Church history and learn how these differentiations developed.Oh but I have, my dear friend. I’ve entered It through faith alone and am saved forevermore. Jesus said:John 10:9 "I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture."There is no other side. When one enters through Christ (by faith alone) you’re in, you’re saved, you find pasture. IOW, contented sheep.I’ll let the Holy Spirit answer you through His inspired Word:Rom 4:1-6 "What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it (his faith) was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:True. But it’s “by GRACE through FAITH” that one “has been saved…not as a result of works” (Eph. 2:8-9).Actually I said it teaches it but won’t admit it. In fact your post verifies it. You perfectly well understand that in RC’ism grace through faith is not the means by which one is saved, but grace, faith and works. The problem is, the latter cancels out the former two. What you’re left with is works.

You know, we have been through this before MoonD. You site these verses and have to add the word “alone” to them. Why do you do this? Catholics agree 100% with the verses you site. We just don’t agree with you fallible, man-made interpretations of them. You have often sited Eph 2:8-9, but as I and others have pointed out before in other threads, you have to keep reading. Eph. 2:10.

 

[sodak]

Well, depends on whom you’re talking to. The Eastern Orthodox surely consider themselves “Catholic,” but not “Roman.”

No, the Orthodox that I’ve talked to consider themselves Orthodox. The Catholic Church has 23 rites, some of them Eastern, which you might be misinterpreting as Catholic.

Rom 4:1-6 "What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it (his faith) was credited to him as righteousness.”

Then reconcile the above quote with this from James:

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou that faith did cooperate with his works and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. 24 Do you see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only? 25 And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers and sending them out another way?

Pretty clear language, I would think. How do you reconcile this apparent contradiction?

 

[guanophore]

You put into words what bothered me about Seeker’s protests. He found no wrong with his mischaracterization of the CC on a Catholic Apologetics thread, yet felt personally attacked when we corrected him with the facts.

Here are the false accusations of Seeker:

-Catholics teach a different Gospel
-Catholics added books to the Bible
-Catholics teach a works salvation

He refused to address the many scriptural passages supporting the teachings of the CC:
Yet he accused us of refusing to dialog.

I have to believe he he has never been exposed to the true teachings of the CC.

I think this is most likely, most people have not, including a lot of Catholics! However, when I offered that this lack of exposure was no fault of his own, he seemed to be offended.

 

[guanophore]

“Abraham believed God, and it (his faith) was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:[/indent]True. But it’s “by GRACE through FAITH” that one “has been saved…not as a result of works” (Eph. 2:8-9).

And the Apostles taught that this “credit” was not just the doctoring of the account to make it look like a credit exists that does not actually, but that we are in reality “made rich” by the sacrifice of Christ. This is what infused righteousness means - actual credit, as opposed to doctoring the books credit.

Actually I said it teaches it but won’t admit it.

No, Moon. the Catholic Church is quite open about her teachings. There are no “secrets”. It is all out there on the web to read. In the documents, especially the catechism. In spite of the fact that the official teaching of the Church is that we are saved by grace, you prefer to cling to your misunderstanding.

 You perfectly well understand that in RC'ism grace through faith is not the means by which one is saved, but grace, faith and works.  The problem is, the latter cancels out the former two.  What you're left with is works.

Do you not agree that the same grace that justifies us is the grace that is working in us to will and to do His good pleasure? How does God working in us to accomplish His will for our lives 'nullify" his grace? You are not making any sense.

I guess you have a need to set up these spurious and baseless “equations” that somehow subract grace for Catholics. It seems like it is necessary in order for you to continue to hold to your erronous ideas of what Catholics believe.

 

[guanophore]

It’s taught but it’s not admitted. You people constantly teach it on this thread (especially you), but you don’t admit it. There’s a difference.Say it right, guanophore.

You are right, there is a difference. I will be the first to admit that the majority of individuals who identify themselves as Catholic do not understand the Teaching of the Church. However, you should not judge the right Teaching of the Church by the misunderstanding of the individuals. It is deplorable that we have such poor catechesis, but that does not nullify the Truth.

You say “initially” justifies. And you always say “God’s grace” but not that God Himself justifies.

To us, it is the same thing. God, in His mercy, justfiies us by grace. There is no other Source of saving grace. I have heard you say this before, but I guess I don’t understand the distinction.

But Scripture states that God Himself justifies the one who has faith in Christ (Rom.3:26, 30), not through works but “through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 3:24) and totally apart from works - period:

Yes. Paul says this because he is Catholic, and this is Catholic teaching.

You, OTOH, teach multiple justifications based on works. We’ve discussed this at length.Oh please guanophore, STOP IT!

We have, which is why I must conclude that your misrepresentation of Catholic teaching is deliberate.

No one can be justified by “works” in the sense that you use this term. We can only be justified by grace. God’s grace works through our faith and our works. The BASIS is grace. It is only you that perceive that, since we believe that grace also brings justification through works, that the BASIS changes. When God is at work in us to will and to do His good pleasure, it is His grace that effects our actions. They are not “our” works of righteousness, but His. To the one that has, more will be given. Once we are justified by His grace, we can earn rewards by doing his will. You agree with this.

Read my quote above and then my previous post where I point out the contextual difference between Eph 2:8-9 and Eph. 2:10.But it’s not the love that saves, it’s faith and the Object of it.

I do believe that it is God’s love that saves us. Mercy is one of the aspects of His love.

Love is the fruit of the Spirit who indwells the believer who has now been cleansed and purged of ALL sins because of the *once for all* sacrificial work of Jesus Christ."*Converted*" is the key word.  "*Converted*" to a Catholic doesn't mean saved, only a hope to *be saved* in the future, and that based on meritorious works.

No, Moon, this is a misunderstanding. It is a misunderstanding if Catholics think it too, and I know some do. Converted DOES mean to be saved. We translate “repent” in the present active participle “do pennance”. Living a life that is worthy of the calling. Hope does not disappoint us, because He who begins a good work in us is faithful to complete it.

Our salvation is not based upon our “meritiorious works”. We are saved by grace, through faith. The basis of salvation is grace. The meritorious works are the evidence of saving grace at work in us, transforming us into His image.

Thus rendering the cross (Christ’s accomplished redemptive work on it) insignificant.

I understand that it seems this way to you, however, for Catholics, it is only the Cross that allows us the privilege to participate in the works that God has prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Say it right, guanophore, that you should merit eternal life by them.

This is simply a semantics problem Moon. “merit” is a Latin term. You are more familiar with the Gk., as am I, which translates it “reward”. Our reward is eternal life. I think the modern understanding of “merit” is too difficult for you to surmount. It might make more sense if we talk about the reward of eternal life.

"*Initial*," that's the key word.

I agree! I think we will both agree that there is a particular point at which we are made right with God, separated from our previous condition, and placed “in Christ”. This is what is referred to as “beginning with Christ” in the scripture.

Everything subsequent to “initial” (which is non-Scriptural, uniquely Catholic) is merited by subsequent works

Actually, it is not uniquely Catholic, but all the Churches founded by Apostles have this understanding, including those who have no love lost on Rome.

You are wrong that everything after the initial is “merited by subsequent works”. What the catechism says, and you accurately quoted, is that once a person is justified, it is then POSSIBLE to merit (or in the Gk, be rewarded). however, we will both agree that not all Christians to earn rewards, and that there are other unmerited graces after the intial one that also sanctify us. No one can “earn” holiness. It is as much of a gift of God to be sanctified as it is to be intially justified, do you not agree?

But it’s not the works that save or justify. It’s the faith. ALWAYS the faith.Rom 4:5 "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,

Paul writes this because he is Catholic. This is Catholic teaching.