C
- Status
C
CopticChristian
Guest
Jon,Of course it does! Your computer is Catholic, while the file is Baptist!!!
Jon
So what you are saying is that I lack the ecumenical software.
J
JRKH
Guest
J
JRKH
Guest
AMEN…
More often than not the thing that separates us is less about fundamental truths than it is about semantics and emphasis…
For instance…Itwin professes ongoing growth in holiness and perseverance. But - he probably has a somewhat different understanding of the terms 'Justification and Sanctification" than we do.
He probably also recognizes the necessity of “works” as described in the book of James, but likely puts a somewhat different emphasis on them
Semantics…:banghead:
Peace
James
L
ltwin
Guest
To me it sounds very Pentecostal. Perhaps you are Pentecostal and don’t realize it
.I agree. Obviously, there are very real differences. But many times we end up arguing about things that when all is said and done we essentially agree on.
I think most Pentecostals would say (if they could speak theological jargon) that justification has no degrees. You either are justified or you are not. The babe in Christ is justified in the same way as the mature Christian is. There is an initial sanctification we experience when we are born again. But there is also sanctification that is progressive. It’s a process, a growth in grace.
If I’m not mistaken, Catholics believe that justification is progressive like sanctification?
While we would say that the internal evidence of conversion is the inner witness of the Spirit, we would also say that there is an outward evidence of conversion which is a life of righteousness and true holiness. This can be seen by others. Paul said that he did not come to the Corinthians with words of wisdom, but in the demonstration of the Holy Spirit and power. The gospel of Christ is powerful. And when the Spirit comes there will be transformation and holiness of life. The Christian religion is not merely a religion of words but also deeds. You may have faith, but without works you possess a dead faith not a living faith. Christ does not give us dead faith.
And obviously, the Spirit comes to empower us to do all this stuff. If we aren’t living in a way that makes people stop and wonder, “What in the world happened to him/her? I don’t know but I want what ever it is!” then maybe we are missing something.
J
JRKH
Guest
Hee…hee…hee…To me it sounds very Pentecostal. Perhaps you are Pentecostal and don’t realize it
:whacky:Amen - and this is one of the real areas where ecumenism can and should work…Toward improving communication and perhaps coming to a more understanding of terms etc.
You are correct…I’m no expert by any stretch but I believe the succinct difference is that the Protestant sees justification as being “Imputed” and the Catholic sees it as “infused”.
In truth - I (personally) like both views. The “initial” imputed justification that must be fostered (through sanctification) or lost (through sin). The longer one perseveres in Sanctification, the more “infused” is that holiness and justification…
Again - it starts to become a question of just how we phrase something that we essentially agree on.
And this is just what we would say as well…I especially like where you mention the idea of possessing a “dead faith”.
My guess is that if we continued this conversation for very long, we would find that the actual sticking points will be less “Theological” and more “governmental”…
Peace
James
James,
I really like this!
It is for me. Ecclesiology is a bigger issue for me than soteriology.My guess is that if we continued this conversation for very long, we would find that the actual sticking points will be less “Theological” and more “governmental”…
Peace also with you,
Jon
J
JRKH
Guest
Thanks Jon…James,
I really like this!
To me, it’s hard to get past the “imputed” aspect of Justification when we are talking about a “new Christian”, or what Paul might call - A spiritual infant.
We deal with this occasionally here when someone will ask "what if someone dies before they have any “works”…they convert and drop dead…
The obvious answer is that they go to heaven…justified in full by their conversion…“In a state of Grace” using the common terminology of the RC.
Of course such scenarios deal with non-normative situations.
In normative circumstances it gets more complicated…“perseverance”, “infusion”, “sanctification” comes into play.
If that initial “justification” is not followed up with the other aspects of conversions that Jesus referred to as “…he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Mt 7:21)…
The person may turn out to be like the rocky soil or the thorny soil and not produce fruit.
Of course everyone is different and the degree of “perfection” attainable varies. But our Loving Father sees this and, so long as His children keep Loving Him and keep trying - (persevering) he makes allowances…
But I think that the Bible is pretty clear that God has little tolerance for “slackers”…( something about “lukewarm” (Rev 3:16)) and needing to be perfect (Mt 5:47)
like I said - get’s complicated to try to explain…
Indeed…But even in Ecclesiology I think that there is a lot that can be agreed on - especially from the biblical view -
As always - Peace my friend…
James
A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
It was for my mother-in-law. I was not “saved” because I had not said the “sinner’s prayer” Once I said that and renounced my “evil” Catholic ways then she was ok with me…oh wait…she wasn’t. And she REALLY didn’t like it when I went back to the Catholic church and took my husband with me
She believes in OSAS…as long as you have said the “sinners” prayer then you are good…
J
JustaServant
Guest
They don’t.Just,
Greg Laurie says that the reason people do not come forward to accept Jesus is because they do not want to be convicted of their sins…another reason is because perhaps in my case…I don’t want to be Protestant. When you have something that has no alternatives other than what Greg proposes you gotta wonder if anyone that does this thinks it through…
It has the same foundation as an “impulse buy” in sales.
This is from the late Jack Hyles, fundamentalist Baptist:
Hyles actually teaches that men may be converted to Christ as a result of some clever method a minister uses in his sermon, and that one’s eternal destiny may be determined by the impulse of an unguarded moment.
In fairness, not all fundamentalists agree with Hyles. However what they fail to see is that Hyles is simply taking thier philosophy to its logical end.
T
TimothyH
Guest
Ecumenism is only available if you upgrade to VII.Jon,
So what you are saying is that I lack the ecumenical software.
-Tim-
J
JustaServant
Guest
You are confusing a person reforming his or her life with salvation.
God does not offer “instant” salvation that changes our personality. People who “pray the sinner’s prayer” are the same people they were before with the same personality, habits, appetites, and characteristics, good and bad. To tell them otherwise, is to lie to them.
Years ago when I was a young fundamentalist I saw a drug addict get “saved” in a revival meeting. He expected his desire for drugs to instantly go away.
It didn’t.
He even went to a faith healer and was “slain in the spirit” to rid himself of the desire.
It didn’t take. He was convinced if he went back to drugs he would “lose his salvation” (the zap). I remember sitting at my dining room table trying to convince him of OSAS 'till 12 midnight. The pastor and church members were of no help.
He relapsed and recovered. He did go back to church. But not that church. He learned very quickly the salvation is a process, not a quick fix.
L
ltwin
Guest
No, I am not. I’m pretty sure you are the one confused. If you’ve read any of my above comments you will clearly see that I have never advocated “zap” salvation. Neither have I advocated “works righteousness.” On the contrary, I have been fairly clear that we grow in grace as we are transformed by the Spirit’s indwelling presence and grow in our fellowship with the Lord.
My comments clearly were in the context of being progressively sanctified. How you transformed them into me supporting instantaneous transformation of a person at the altar is beyond my understanding.
That is unfortunate. But that was not what I was talking about. I’m aware that some may believe that, but for the record my comments do not reflect that kind of soteriology.
R
Rabbity
Guest
I could be wrong but I think this resembles what the orthodox call “theosis,” the process of increasing union with God over time.
J
JRKH
Guest
It very likely does. This view is certainly not unknown in the west as witnessed by a number of Saints of the “mystic” tradition in the Church, Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross being perhaps the best known.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
It very likely does. This view is certainly not unknown in the west as witnessed by a number of Saints of the “mystic” tradition in the Church, Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross being perhaps the best known.
Terminolgies and approaches might vary but whether one calls it theosis, or sanctification the goal is generally the same. That is, to seek to become “perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt 5:48). Our Justification cannot be a “positional” one - it cannot stand still.
I believe this is the error that the resolution in the OP is trying to address and is seen in certain theological propositions. For example, those who claim that you cannot lose your salvation after “being saved and accepting Jesus” are really embracing a “positional” Justification that denies (or ignores) the call to perfection.
Repentance followed by sanctification is the path that move us forward toward God, to being “Christ-like”, to being “changed” - infused - more and more with the Agape Love that “Is God” (1 John 4:7-8)
Peace
James
P
Patavium
Guest
A friendly question Itwin,
Which of the following do you believe in ?
In this analogy we have three persons, let’s call them John, Jim and Theo. John and Jim represent all men – John represent those will go to heaven, which in this analogy is represented by going to the concert, of which a ticket, representing salvation, is required. Jim represents those who do not go to heaven while Theo represents God.
Which of the following do you believe in ?
In this analogy we have three persons, let’s call them John, Jim and Theo. John and Jim represent all men – John represent those will go to heaven, which in this analogy is represented by going to the concert, of which a ticket, representing salvation, is required. Jim represents those who do not go to heaven while Theo represents God.
M
mark_a
Guest
L
ltwin
Guest
Choice 2. However, these analogies are very limited. We’re not John and Jim being offered tickets to a concert. We’re you and I being offered eternal life through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. There is no way I can “afford” that. Jesus paid the price for the “ticket” on the cross. Jesus stands with arms wide open saying whosoever will let him come. When I come to him, I have to be willing not only to recite a confession of faith or a sinner’s prayer. I must give him my entire being, everything that I am. That doesn’t happen in a moment, though moments are important milestones in our walk with Christ. That can only happen over a lifetime for most of us and only by the grace of God for any of us.
- Status