The church is to complicated?

[Jon_S_1]

My internet search could not find the text of the Rite of Baptism as used today. So I asked my brother about this (Father Eric Filmer, a CAF Apologist). This is his reply:

So “Baptism” seems the “default” response, at least in the English Rite, while “Faith” (or something similar) may be licitly substituted at the discretion of the celebrant.

I think it awkward to ask “faith” from the Church. The Church can obviously encourage and promote faith (as Fr. Eric explains), but I don’t believe the Church can impart faith (it is one of the theological virtues of the Holy Spirit). I suppose it is to be inferred that the Church’s role is in support of faith, rather than as a source of faith. But it seems that “Baptism” is a “better” answer, as it asks of the Church what the Church has the ability to confer, without making any assumptions.

This post makes me feel like you have a hard time seeing the forest through the trees to get so hung up on that detail.

The point of course is that faith is required in some form. Belief is required in some form.

Here is a real example. One we see everyday.

A person is born and raised catholic. Their parents teach them to follow the precepts as you describe and they go to mass and confession . Their parents and church never nurture and grow their faith. They never tell them to have a heart of conversion. They never tell them why we should do those things. Why we should be disciples of Christ.

What happens? The kids stop going to church. At best they do find faith and become Protestant seeing our rituals as empty.

That is a real case study.

How do we change it? By taking positions opposite of yours.

 

[steve_b]

Can you show me, in actual Catholic doctrine, ANYTHING that says that a person must do anything more than remain in a State of Grace in order to attain salvation? (to do this, of course, we must respect the five precepts).

To be fair, you said

“We are not saved by our knowledge, or beliefs, our faith, our works, our reception of any other Sacrament (including Eucharist), rosaries, private prayer, study of the Bible or the Catechism, or by anything else. All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.”

Go back and look for yourself #26

Just being transparent, when I responded #32. , I had a hard time even concentrating on my response to that.

.

 

[Jon_S_1]

To be fair, you said

“We are not saved by our knowledge, or beliefs, our faith, our works, our reception of any other Sacrament (including Eucharist), rosaries, private prayer, study of the Bible or the Catechism, or by anything else. All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.”

Go back and look for yourself #26

Just being transparent, when I responded, I had a hard time even concentrating on my response to that.

.

I would also say to David, that the reason the catechism is more than 5 bullet points is because there is a lot more to it than that.

Sacraments are worthless without faith and belief. I would also say, that one cannot maintain a state of grace without faith and belief and their charitable works. These things are essential.

This is different than a “crisis of faith” If someone has doubts about the faith, but maintains faith by practicing the faith even when they don’t get it or feel it, then that person is believing in the hope that the church teaches. That person is having faith in the sacraments and the church and ultimately God despite their doubts.

This is far different than your claim that faith and belief do not matter…that is just false.

 

[steve_b]

I would also say to David, that the reason the catechism is more than 5 bullet points is because there is a lot more to it than that.

Sacraments are worthless without faith and belief. I would also say, that one cannot maintain a state of grace without faith and belief and their charitable works. These things are essential.

This is different than a “crisis of faith” If someone has doubts about the faith, but maintains faith by practicing the faith even when they don’t get it or feel it, then that person is believing in the hope that the church teaches. That person is having faith in the sacraments and the church and ultimately God despite their doubts.

This is far different than your claim that faith and belief do not matter…that is just false.

I would just add to that

837 "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who - by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion - are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but ‘in body’ not ‘in heart’

Re: Charity…It’s a BIG word.

It’s not just popping a few bucks in the basket once in awhile. It’s way bigger than that. Here’s 10 pages of explanation on charity. ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=charity&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

 

[DavidFilmer]

This post makes me feel like you have a hard time seeing the forest through the trees to get so hung up on that detail.

It was just a point of curiosity - why does the Catechism say one thing, but I remember we say another? I should have opened a new thread to discuss it. It is off-topic to this discussion and I regret bringing it up here. Please disregard.

 

[DavidFilmer]

To be fair, you said

“We are not saved by our knowledge, or beliefs, our faith, our works, our reception of any other Sacrament (including Eucharist), rosaries, private prayer, study of the Bible or the Catechism, or by anything else. All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.”

And I stand by that. But you selectively quote me, omitting the next sentence in this same paragraph which adds important context to my statement,

All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.

This is the Faith of the Church.

 

[DavidFilmer]

I would also say to David, that the reason the catechism is more than 5 bullet points is because there is a lot more to it than that.

Obviously. Otherwise, the Catechism would be distributed on index cards.

I would also say, that one cannot maintain a state of grace without faith and belief and their charitable works. These things are essential.

They are not essential in their commission (what we do). If we are in a State of Grace, our faith, beliefs, and works will not “enhance” our State of Grace - we are either saved, or we are condemned. You can’t be “more” saved. You can’t get “more” Jesus.

(if you want to talk about the effect on our experience of the afterlife then I doubt we will have any disagreement, but, in this thread, we’re talking about what happens down here.)

Only mortal sin can remove us from a state of Grace. Willful unfaithfulness, obstinate disbelief, or deliberate refusal to perform reasonable works of charity may rise to mortal sin. These would be sins of omission (what we willfully, knowingly, and deliberately refuse to do). Once we have lost our Baptismal Grace, no faith or belief or works can restore us - that’s what Sacramental Confession is for. It is a grave error to say that we are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism AND anything else].

We are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism and by nothing else - not faith or beliefs, or works, or anything else. Deliberate refusal of faith, beliefs, or works can be mortally sinful, given sufficient knowledge and consent.

This is different than a “crisis of faith” If someone has doubts about the faith, but maintains faith by practicing the faith even when they don’t get it or feel it, then that person is believing in the hope that the church teaches. That person is having faith in the sacraments and the church and ultimately God despite their doubts.

I did stipulate that part of the minimum requirement that the Church (not me) has established is to respect the five precepts of the Church. This includes attending Mass on Sundays and days of obligation. And, yes, obedience of this rule is, at least, a small act of faith - maybe not even in God, but in the Church.

This is far different than your claim that faith and belief do not matter…that is just false.

Please tell me where I ever said such a thing. I have said they are not necessary for salvation, but that they help us remain in a state of grace. Do you believe that something that helps us remain in a state of grace does not matter?

Would you listen to yourself? If I told you that Scriptures were useful but not necessary (which is, ahem, Catholic teaching) would you conclude that Scripture doesn’t matter?

 

[steve_b]

And I stand by that. But you selectively quote me, omitting the next sentence in this same paragraph which adds important context to my statement,

Then let’s try this again

You wrote

“We are saved by the Grace of Christian Baptism and by nothing else CCC 1263], (Our Baptismal Grace is renewed, if necessary, by Sacramental Confession CCC 1446]). We are not saved by our knowledge, or beliefs, our** faith,** our works, our reception of any other Sacrament (including Eucharist), rosaries, private prayer, study of the Bible or the Catechism, or by anything else. All of these things help us remain in a State of Grace, but none are necessary for salvation, and none of these things can restore our Baptismal Grace if it is lost through mortal sin.”

What’s in red I’m stunned you would say that given the context of what has been boldened
D:

This is the Faith of the Church.

Absolutely NOT

 

[Ignatius]

She has also supplamented this statment by using a bible reference to where Jesus said he came to do away with all the rules and that religion is supposed to be easy.

I think she’s mistaken. Can you ask her to show you exactly where Jesus said “I came to do away with all the rules”? I would also be interested in where Jesus said “religion is supposed to be easy”. Ask her to write down the Book, Chapter and Verse for each one.

I do know that He said, “You must pick up your Cross and follow me” and “whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.” (Matthew 16: 24-25) Does that sound easy?

Note, I have given the Book, Chapter and Verses, The book is the Gospel according to Matthew, Chapter 16 and verses 24 and 25.

 

[DavidFilmer]

What’s in red I’m stunned you would say that given the context of what has been boldened

Absolutely NOT

No, and you are absolutely correct. I was completely wrong, and I recant everything I have said. Because I came across this passage in Scripture that convinced me of the error of my ways:

Now someone approached Jesus and said, “Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?”

And Jesus said unto him, “Well, are you doing now?”

The man replied, “Teacher, I have kept the Commandments since my youth.”

And Jesus rebuked the man, saying, "You pathetic excuse for a Jew! Don’t you know there are six hundred some odd rules (I lost count) under the Mosaic Law? And you keep only TEN? You do the minimum! How can you possibly hope for eternal life doing just the minimum?

And, besides that, you have to go off and read the Scriptures on your own, and everything you come across that seems to be virtuous behavior - well, you gotta do that, too.

Then Jesus admonished him: Go follow all those laws and whatever personal interpretation you have of Scripture and THEN we can start talking about eternal life. Depart from me, wretched scoundrel, for I will have nothing to do with you until you do a whole lot more than the minimum. [Matthew 19: 16-21, SteveB Edition]

Uh, oh, waitaminute. I just realized the SteveB Edition is not approved for liturgical use by the USCCB (no Nihil Obstat or Imprimatur). So, just for kicks, I looked up the same passage in the New American Bible. It seems to say something completely different:

Now someone approached him and said, “Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?”

He answered him, “Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

14 He asked him, “Which ones?” And Jesus replied, " ‘You shall not kill; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother’; and ‘you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’"

The young man said to him, “All of these I have observed from my youth. What do I still lack?”

Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to (the) poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” [Matthew 19: 16-21, NAB]

Maybe it’s just semantics and the SteveB edition is really saying the same thing as the NAB. I’m no scripture scholar, but it seems to me that the NAB version of the story has Jesus telling the man that, if he wants eternal life, he should start with the very basics. He doesn’t even name ALL of the Ten Commandments - he names only five (the sixth thing Jesus names is not part of the Didache). I wonder if it’s just a coincidence that there are five precepts of the Church.

THEN, if he wants to pursue a higher spirituality, perfection, he must commit himself even further.

So, lets see… we start with the minimum (which is enough, in itself) and move on from there towards perfection, if we choose to do so.

Why, by golly, that sounds exactly like what I’ve been saying all along. So I recant my recantation.

 

[steve_b]

No, and you are absolutely correct. I was completely wrong, and I recant everything I have said. Because I came across this passage in Scripture that convinced me of the error of my ways:

Uh, oh, waitaminute. I just realized the SteveB Edition is not approved for liturgical use by the USCCB (no Nihil Obstat or Imprimatur). So, just for kicks, I looked up the same passage in the New American Bible. It seems to say something completely different:

Maybe it’s just semantics and the SteveB edition is really saying the same thing as the NAB. I’m no scripture scholar, but it seems to me that the NAB version of the story has Jesus telling the man that, if he wants eternal life, he should start with the very basics. He doesn’t even name ALL of the Ten Commandments - he names only five (the sixth thing Jesus names is not part of the Didache). I wonder if it’s just a coincidence that there are five precepts of the Church.

• The 5 precepts of the Church don’t match the 5 commandments Jesus mentioned
• Jesus doesn’t have to name all 10 commandments. He’s obviously talking to a guy who already knows them all
• Why would Jesus quote the Didache, it hadn’t been written yet?

D:

THEN, if he wants to pursue a higher spirituality, perfection, he must commit himself even further.

So, lets see… we start with the minimum (which is enough, in itself) and move on from there towards perfection, if we choose to do so.

Why, by golly, that sounds exactly like what I’ve been saying all along. So I recant my recantation.

Haven’t you heard the saying when you find yourself in a hole stop digging.

Re: the passage you quote

Mt 19:16 And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?” 17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” 18 Then he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not commit murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; 19 Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 20 The young man *said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?” 21 Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be a]complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

Ask yourself, if Jesus was telling this guy he was going to heaven based on what he told Jesus, and what Jesus told him, why would he ask Jesus the question, "All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?”

Now here’s the part you left out.

" 22 But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property.

23 And Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

That was a very important part you left out…agreed?

IOW, this guy based on what he heard from Jesus, wasn’t understanding Jesus to be saying to him what you think He meant, that he has a spot in heaven, no problem. If it was no problem he would have just said thank you Jesus and been on his way. But that isn’t what happened now is it.

your understanding of minimum is wrong.

 

[DavidFilmer]

*]The 5 precepts of the Church don’t match the 5 commandments Jesus mentioned

I didn’t say they did. I just wondered if five commands / five precepts was a coincidence because of the number five. It was a curiosity. I shouldn’t have mentioned it. I just get curious sometimes.

*]Jesus doesn’t have to name all 10 commandments. He’s obviously talking to a guy who already knows them all

That’s my point. He could have just said “all of them” and not named ANY. But he didn’t. He named only half of them - LESS than the minimum.

*]Why would Jesus quote the Didache, it hadn’t been written yet?

Sorry, I meant Decalogue. I think you knew that.

Mt 19:16 And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?” 17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” 18 Then he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not commit murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; 19 Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 20 The young man *said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?” 21 Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be a]complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

Ask yourself, if Jesus was telling this guy he was going to heaven based on what he told Jesus, and what Jesus told him, why would he ask Jesus the question, "

Because he felt he could do more. Jesus told him already that he fulfilled the minimum: “if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments” (which the man had done). But the man wanted to go beyond the minimum (as do many Catholics).

Now here’s the part you left out.
" 22 But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property.

So he was unwilling to do what Jesus told him beyond the minimum. This doesn’t make Jesus a liar when he said, “if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” There is nothing in Scripture that suggests the man had been saved (because he kept the commandments) but was subsequently condemned to hell because of his attachment to his belongings.

We have no moral obligation to sell everything we have and give it to the poor and join a monastery (which would be the modern equivalent of what Jesus told the young man to do). SOME people do this. SOME people pursue (and attain) spiritual perfection on earth. Some people attain spiritual perfection in their ordinary, workaday secular lives (St. Therese of Liseux was made a Doctor of the Church for teaching this). Personally, I feel good if I can just keep myself in a State of Grace - I doubt perfection is something I will ever achieve in my life. Nor is it necessary for my salvation (thanks be to God).

That was a very important part you left out…agreed?

Disagree. Not only did I think it was unimportant, I didn’t even think it was relevant. Did you think Jesus was telling the young man that he must do this or he would be damned? Even after Jesus told him he would have life if he merely obeyed the commandments? You have a very, umm, unusual (and selective) style of exegesis.

IOW, this guy based on what he heard from Jesus, wasn’t understanding Jesus to be saying to him what you think He meant, that he has a spot in heaven, no problem. If it was no problem he would have just said thank you Jesus and been on his way. But that isn’t what happened now is it.

You are absolutely correct - that’s not what happened. The young man wanted more than the minimum. Catholics also often want more than the minimum. That doesn’t mean the minimum is not enough in itself (or else the minimum would be less than the minimum). It means many are not satisfied with the minimum and WANT to do more (but may lack the actual will to do more).

your understanding of minimum is wrong.

You are saying the minimum is not enough. Exactly how do you define “minimum?” Dictionary.com defines it:

the least or smallest amount or quantity possible, attainable, or required.

(in this case, “required” is the operative word).

You have a funny idea of a minimum. If a bank says you have to have a minimum deposit of $100, and you go in with $100, and they tell you it is not enough, you would be incredulous. So, tell me, how do YOU understand the plain English word “minimum?”

 

[steve_b]

I didn’t say they did. I just wondered if five commands / five precepts was a coincidence because of the number five. It was a curiosity. I shouldn’t have mentioned it. I just get curious sometimes.

That’s my point. He could have just said “all of them” and not named ANY. But he didn’t. He named only half of them - LESS than the minimum.

Sorry, I meant Decalogue. I think you knew that.

Because he felt he could do more. Jesus told him already that he fulfilled the minimum: “if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments” (which the man had done). But the man wanted to go beyond the minimum (as do many Catholics).

So he was unwilling to do what Jesus told him beyond the minimum. This doesn’t make Jesus a liar when he said, “if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” There is nothing in Scripture that suggests the man had been saved (because he kept the commandments) but was subsequently condemned to hell because of his attachment to his belongings.

We have no moral obligation to sell everything we have and give it to the poor and join a monastery (which would be the modern equivalent of what Jesus told the young man to do). SOME people do this. SOME people pursue (and attain) spiritual perfection on earth. Some people attain spiritual perfection in their ordinary, workaday secular lives (St. Therese of Liseux was made a Doctor of the Church for teaching this). Personally, I feel good if I can just keep myself in a State of Grace - I doubt perfection is something I will ever achieve in my life. Nor is it necessary for my salvation (thanks be to God).

Disagree. Not only did I think it was unimportant, I didn’t even think it was relevant. Did you think Jesus was telling the young man that he must do this or he would be damned? Even after Jesus told him he would have life if he merely obeyed the commandments? You have a very, umm, unusual (and selective) style of exegesis.

You are absolutely correct - that’s not what happened. The young man wanted more than the minimum. Catholics also often want more than the minimum. That doesn’t mean the minimum is not enough in itself (or else the minimum would be less than the minimum). It means many are not satisfied with the minimum and WANT to do more (but may lack the actual will to do more).

You are saying the minimum is not enough. Exactly how do you define “minimum?” Dictionary.com defines it:
(in this case, “required” is the operative word).

You have a funny idea of a minimum. If a bank says you have to have a minimum deposit of $100, and you go in with $100, and they tell you it is not enough, you would be incredulous. So, tell me, how do YOU understand the plain English word “minimum?”

Your example contradicted your preposition.

As I said, when you find you’re in a hole stop digging.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Your example contradicted your preposition.

As I said, when you find you’re in a hole stop digging.

OK, then tell me what you think my preposition is. What point do you think I am trying to make, in your own words? I think, if I understand that, I will understand your answers better.

 

[Christian50]

Hello DavidFilmer and Steve B,

The following quotes might help you to view our salvation in the same way:

We must know the RCC teaching on the CONDITIONS to be QUALIFIED to do SUPERNATURAL MERIT, which are as follows:

The CONDITIONS must be present to make supernatural merit possible:

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

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

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

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

Justification in Catholic Teaching by Jimmy Akin

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

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

The following RCC teaching on Justification and Salvation which teaching qualifies us to do supernatural merit if we believe them:

For example:

HOW TO READ THE NEW TESTAMENT By Etienne Charpentier

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

Quote: “There is ONE CENTRAL QUESTION here: how can we become righteous and be saved? We are NOT justified by what we do (works, observing law) but by FAITH IN CHRIST.
Salvation is NOT a matter of achieving but RECEIVING IT FREELY from God hands, in faith.” End quote. (Emphasize mine.)

Catholic teaching (Catholic Customs and Practices) also states:
Quote: “Catholic believes salvation by GRACE ALONE, SOLELY on account of the work of Christ.” End quote.

[SOLELY (means EXCLUSIVELY) … = FAITH ALONE]

JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION
by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church.

4/25 We confess together that sinners are JUSTIFIED BY FAITH in the saving action of God in Christ. WHATEVER in the JUSTIFIED PRECEDES or FOLLOWS the free gift of FAITH is NEITHER THE BASIS of justification NOR MERITS it.

4/27.The Catholic understanding also sees FAITH as FUNDAMENTAL in justification. FOR WITHOUT FAITH, NO JUSTIFICATION CAN TAKE PLACE. Thus justifying grace never becomes a human possession. While Catholic teaching emphasizes the RENEWAL OF LIFE by justifying grace, this RENEWAL in FAITH, HOPE, LOVE is always dependent on God’s unfathomable grace and CONTRIBUTES NOTHING TO JUSTIFICATION.

As we see it above: Our salvation is God’s FREE GIFT!
We can receive it by FAITH alone or NOT at all.

Our attempt of addition/contribution to it is rejection of God’s free gift of salvation.

Continued

 

[Christian50]

HOW TO BECOME A CHRISTIAN by Matt Slick

You do not become a Christian by anything you do like keeping the Ten Commandments.
You do not become a Christian by being a member of a church. You do not become a Christian by being sincere.

What must you do?
You must believe in Jesus ALONE (who is God in flesh–John 1:1, 14); you must trust Him ALONE (Acts 4:12; John 14:6); you must receive Jesus (John 1:12) and his sacrifice for your sins.
Salvation (being saved from God’s righteous judgment) is NOT by your works but by God’s grace (Eph. 2:8).

Though there are no rules or steps to becoming a Christian, the following is a biblical summarization of what you need to know:

1. RECOGNIZE your sinfulness before God (sin is breaking God’s law. Sin is things like lying, stealing, etc.):

A.“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned–” (Rom. 5:12)

2.RECOGNIZE that your sin has caused a separation between you and Gad.

A.“But your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear.” (Isaiah 59:2).

3.YOU MUST believe that Jesus is the only way to God:
A.“I am the way, the truth, and the Life, and no one comes to the Father but by Me.” (John 14:6).

4.Ask Jesus to forgive you of your sins because JESUS HAS THE AUTHORITY to forgive you of your sins.

A.“Then Jesus came to them and said, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.’” (Matt. 28:18, NIV) . . . and

B.Jesus told you to ask Him for your requests: “You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.” (John 14:14, NIV) . . . and

C.Jesus is the one who forgives sins: “But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins . . . ‘He said to the paralytic, "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.’” (Mark 2:10-11, NIV).

D.This last “step” is called receiving Jesus. John 1:12 says, “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.”

5.TURN AWAY from your sin:

A.“In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent,” (Acts 17:30)

“PRODUCE FRUIT in keeping with repentance;” (Matt. 3:8)

If you want to become a Christian, you must receive Jesus as your Savior (John 1:12).
We recommend that you pray to Him and ask Him to forgive you of your sins and teach you how to follow Him in truth. Jesus said, “Ask me anything in my name and I will do it.” (John 14:14).

Also, consider what Jesus taught in Luke 18:9-14,

"And He also told this parable to certain ones who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee, and the other a tax-gatherer.

11 “The Pharisee stood and was praying thus to himself, ‘God, I thank Thee that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax-gatherer.

12 ‘I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’

13 “But the tax-gatherer, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’

14 “I tell you, this man went down to his house JUSTIFIED rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled, but he who humbles himself shall be exalted.”

Notice that the Tax Gather made no appeal to anything he had done. There was NO BAPTISM—NO WORKS. He simple confessed his sin and trusted in God.

Also, consider what Paul said in Rom. 4:1-5,

"What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found?

2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about; but not before God.

3 For what does the Scripture say? “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.”

4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not reckoned as a favor, but as what is due.

5 But to the one who DOES NOT WORK, but BELIEVES in Him who justifies the ungodly, his FAITH is reckoned as RIGHTEOUSNESS."

Paul teaches that we are made right before God by faith–NOT by faith and works but by FAITH ALONE.

That faith must be IN CHRIST and HIS WORK ON THE CROSS where he bore our sins in his body (1 Pet. 2:24).

Jesus can save you. Trust in Him ALONE. End quote.

CONCLUSION

In my opinion: Any Christian, regardless of being Catholic or Protestant, who believes the above teaching of the RCC qualified to do supernatural merit and if he dies in the state of grace he will go to heaven with abundant supernatural merit.

They don’t go to heaven by “grace alone,” “faith alone” and SOLELY on account of the work of Christ” because they go to heaven with abundant supernatural merit as well.

I also believe; those who are working to avoid hell, (if they die in the state of grace) they go to heaven “grace alone,” “faith alone” and “SOLELY on account of the work of Christ” (Rom.4:5; Rom.4:25; rom.5:18; 1 Cor.3:15; etc.) because all their “Faithless, graceless works of any kind (this includes those of the Law and those under the new covenant; communion, confession, etc.), are works attempts of self-justification]” and at the judgment rejected by God (1 Cor.3:11-15).

(All emphasize added.)

God bless.

Christian

 

[Christian50]

Sorry, it is my mistake. Please disregard my above quote from Matt Slick.

God bless.

Christian

 

[DavidFilmer]

Thanks, Christian50. That was good info, but I doubt it will sway SteveB.

I’m wondering what SteveB (and JonS) thinks I am trying to say. Jon even went so far as to ask me what is my “angle” - as if I had some nefarious purpose other than to provide a doctrinally accurate answer to the OPs question. I get the impression that SteveB thinks the same thing.

I really think I have stated my case badly, though it does not seem poorly stated to me. But I am convinced that, if they understood what I am saying, they would completely agree. So they must think I’m saying something other than what I intend to say.

If I could understand what they think my “angle” is then maybe I could clarify. Because everything I have said comes straight from the Catechism (not my personal interpretation of Scripture or anything else). They also cite the Catechism, but not anything that categorically relates to salvation (as the stuff I cited does).

 

[Jon_S_1]

Thanks, Christian50. That was good info, but I doubt it will sway SteveB.

I’m wondering what SteveB (and JonS) thinks I am trying to say. Jon even went so far as to ask me what is my “angle” - as if I had some nefarious purpose other than to provide a doctrinally accurate answer to the OPs question. I get the impression that SteveB thinks the same thing.

I really think I have stated my case badly, though it does not seem poorly stated to me. But I am convinced that, if they understood what I am saying, they would completely agree. So they must think I’m saying something other than what I intend to say.

If I could understand what they think my “angle” is then maybe I could clarify. Because everything I have said comes straight from the Catechism (not my personal interpretation of Scripture or anything else). They also cite the Catechism, but not anything that categorically relates to salvation (as the stuff I cited does).

What I see you advocating David is essentially the following.

Believing in Christ is unnecessary
Conforming ones life to be a follower of Christ is not necessary
Having faith in Christ is not necessary

All that one need do is follow a couple rules.

Then in one of the threads we are discussing you seem to further advocate that everyone is saved regardless of their faith or choices in life.

So frankly I see you speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Saying sometimes that everyone is saved regardless, other times that one must stay in a state of grace, and yet other times that one need not have faith or belief in anything.

Id love a concise clarification.

 

[steve_b]

OK, then tell me what you think my preposition is. What point do you think I am trying to make, in your own words? I think, if I understand that, I will understand your answers better.

You argue doing the minimum is good enough. #51

My point is, that misrepresents the example you used between Jesus and the rich man.

I would argue, that rich man obviously didn’t think the minimum was enough for heaven. He even asked “what am I still lacking”? If he is told by Jesus he will go to heaven keeping a few commandments and saying he is doing them already, then why does he further ask Jesus, “what am I still lacking” ? I’m thinking, What’s still bothering him? I don’t buy your answer. I would argue, he knows the answer he got is not enough. So he asks Jesus that question

Jesus didn’t say it was impossible for a rich man to get into heaven, just that it was very difficult.

The analogy of that rich man, and a camel getting through the eye of a needle, makes the point. And the rich man went away grieved.

Why was he grieved? According to you he was told he was going to heaven keeping a few commandments? Obviously that rich guy went away with a different understanding.

Not to mention, we don’t want to put all salvation understanding on one quick story and analogy