The Commandments should not be followed ... Part 2

[Catholic_Dude]

What I find interesting, Catholic Dude, is the internal inconsistencies in the arguments of those who teach faith alone. When you point out James 2:24, they immediately say that James is teaching that genuine faith produces good works. However, when you point out a verse like…

… many will admit that this is a reference to genuine Christians. So if they are genuine Christians, they must have genuine faith. If they have genuine faith, why haven’t they born fruit? Doesn’t genuine faith automatically leads to good fruit, according to the standard Protestant interpretation of James 2? And if it’s not true in the case of John 15:2, then the Protestant interpretation of James 2 does not hold water because John 15:2 proves that a person can have genuine saving faith without having followed up on that faith with good works.

The key, I have realized, is that you simply need to employ their own logic against them. And you have done this numerous times. The same logic works against the claim of assurance of going to Heaven “contrasted” to the Catholics living in fear and uncertainty.

Secondly, we have 2 Peter 1:5-9

5 But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, 6 to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, 7 to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. 8 For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

Note that Peter does not say, “he who lacks these things (virtue, knowledge, self-control, perserverance, godliness, brotherly kindness, love) never had faith or was never really saved.” He says that “he who lackes these things… has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.” In order for that person to have been cleansed from his old sins, he must have had genuine faith. That makes sense because Peter opens by saying that one must add these things to faith. And he says that we must give “all diligence.” “Diligence” means earnest effort.

This is one of my favorite passages. Here are some other favorites I have found:
1 Tim 3: 6He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil.
This is talking about men who want to become a bishop. Amazingly Paul says the risk of pride is higher for recent converts and they could fall into the same condemnation as the devil. What about eternal security and good works guaranteed?
1 Tim 5: 8If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
This is a contradiction in Calvinist theology, there is no such thing as “worse than an unbeliever” because an unbeliever is as bad as it gets, they are unsaved, unregenerate, they can do no good.
1 Tim 5: 11As for younger widows, do not put them on such a list. For when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry. 12Thus they bring judgment on themselves, because they have broken their first pledge. 13Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house. And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to. 14So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander. 15Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan.
Where is the good works and eternal security here?
1 Cor 8: 9Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10For if anyone with a weak conscience sees you who have this knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, won’t he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols? 11So this weak brother, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall.
Good bye limited atonement and eternal security.

This again contradicts the standard Protestant interpretation of James 2 because true faith should automatically lead to good works. Consequently, the Protestant once again must address the following question made in James 2:14

**14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? **

The obvious answer is no, hence the popular Protestant mantra “the faith that saves is a faith that works.” However, how do they deal with those in Christ who have not born fruit, thus having a faith that has not worked?

Yes, and James is talking to “brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (not unbelievers) who have “insulted the poor” (2:1, 6). Further, and more importantly the term “save” in v14 is in reference to justification, hence the CONTEXT is salvation, not demonstrating you are already saved in front of men.

And how do you reconcile the salvation of these “unfruitful” Christians with passages like:

Revelation 2:26

26 And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations—

Revalation 2:10

Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.

Calvinists don’t like Rev ch2-ch3, there we see large groups of Christians turning to lives of sin and threatened to stop or pay the consequences.

Galatians 6:7-9

7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. 8 For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life. 9 And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart.

Romans 2:6-8

6 who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath,

John 5:28-29

28 Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

Totally unbiblical, this is nothing but salvation by works. I wont accept it.

 

[banjo]

Pax, thanks for posting this. Sometimes I wonder if it’s all in the wording…like reading a passage in the bible that you have read many times before but for some reason the latest reading generates a thought that has never occured to you in previous readings. Chesterton wrote something to the effect that a person can read something 999 times, but if he reads it the 1,000th time he is in danger of understanding it.

Just for the record (I don’t want to mislead or misquote GK) here is the Chesterton quote.
“If you look at a thing 999 times you are safe, but if you look at it for the one thousandth time, you are in frightful danger of seeing it for the first time.”

 

[mikeledes]

The key, I have realized, is that you simply need to employ their own logic against them. And you have done this numerous times.

Indeed! They believe argue that God has saved us competely and perfectly the moment we believe - which I assume means that our past, present, and future sins have been forgiven at that very moment and for all eternity - and yet you have a verse like…

32But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world.

… which expressly states that the purpose of divine chastening is to prevent condemnation. If a person has been saved perfectly and completely when they believed, then why does God need to chasten them so that they are not condemned? Isn’t the divine and eternal declaration of acuittal from our sins sufficient to prevent condemnation, since an eternal acuqittal means absolutely no possibility of condemnation. And you pointed out a very good verse:

1 Tim 3: 6

6and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.

If he is a Christian and thus has been eternally acquitted from his sins the moment he believed, then why can’t he be a bishop? It’s not like becoming conceited is going to cause loss of salvation since that is impossible. And if he is not a genuine Christian, does it really matter? If he is not a true believer, then he is already condemned and hence cannot fall into a condemnation he has never escaped. Again, the express purpose (so that/ hina clause) of this is to prevent a new Christian from becoming conceited and thus falling into condemnation. So obviously Paul has true Christians in mind because the unbeliever is already “condemned.” If Paul truly believed in the eternal acquittal of the believer, then this makes absolutely no sense.

God bless,
Michael

 

[Thing]

I have, but you haven’t. I’ll ask again, does God save by (sovereign) grace or do you save yourself?

So, does God save you against your will?

There is always an offer of salvation and endless graces [favours or helps] available from a bountiful God, But to receive them we must accept them by moving our will and accepting them.

 

[BRB]

If a person has been saved perfectly and completely when they believed, then why does God need to chasten them so that they are not condemned?

Because the Father loves his children, and discipline focuses the mind with regards to post-salvation sins committed … and encourages contrition and confession … and better behaviors in future.

Did your Father throw you overboard when you were disobedient ?

How many times does Christ tell us to forgive others who sin against us ? Do we not KNOW that he is equally willing to forgive us … provided we turn from our sins EACH TIME, show respect, and demonstrate Christian growth [fruits of spirit].

If we don’t listen and obey, we will get a final ultimatum …and if we then ignore God [spitting on his commands, abasing the H.S.] … we have asked God for divorce and commit Apostasy. We get OUR WISH … and cut off of the Tree of Life.

 

[BRB]

So faith is man’s and yet it is a requirement for salvation. How, then, is grace still grace if it requires something of man’s?

]

Faith is often fleeting and not total commitment. Christ knows those who demonstrate TOTAL FAITH. Scripture teaches God knows our every thought/intention.

But, God doesn’t desire our total faith in our ability to merit his graces … rather, our Faith conviction of HIS “total faithfulness to us”, and desire to merit his graces [love] to us thru Christ. We could never make a commitment to Christ …except God choses to draw us by H.S. “Many are called, few are chosen” … per Christ’s Word. So, many [ALL] are drawn … and few accept God’s calling.

What does Christ desire from us besides Total Faith in him to forgive our sins ? We must consent to be his Disciples and obey HIS WILL for our lives. We must consent to adoption into his family. The CRUX tipping point is reached when we yield our ‘free will’ to the Father’s will. Then the ‘second birth’ of spiritual adoption occurs. It’s completely the Work of Christ and H.S. … the hands of God reaching down to mankind in Loving Forgiveness.

We can only reach the Father thru the Son … as led by H.S. We are lifted up to the Father via the Hands of God.

Christ presents us to the Father, and the Father ALWAYS ACCEPTS what his Son offers up to Him. We are joined in Trinitarian Baptism. A spiritual rebirth [illumination] occurs … the convert is given a new ‘spiritual’ heart. The sealing of the convert to the Trinity. We become part of God’s family [Church].

The 3rd Person’s hand remains extended to us … linking us to the Father & Son. We retain our ‘free will’ [mind/ spirit] as God returns it to us [in better shape than before]. But, it is now illuminated by God’s light. We have a supernatural, 24-7’spiritual channel’ we never had before.

And we keep the Commandments out of a NEW heartfelt love to please/obey our Lord … not in an attempt to merit our salvation ---- "lest any man boast’ … of his abilities, and get puffed up with pride.

 

[Philthy]

Faith/belief - same thing. “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved.”

Actually there is a difference. “Through faith” can certainly be viewed to be an ongoing event because faith endures, deepens, etc. When you substitute “at the time of belief” that is considerably more limited than the term “through faith”

Only if one refuses to think about it. Unless one thinks, everything is meaningless.

Really? Is the gospel meaningless unless I think about it? Once again it sounds like it is dependent upon something I do - think. That brings us back to the confusion you have regarding our need to cooperate through the exercise of free will with grace.

I’ll ask again: Define “a gospel.” Define “grace.” Define “God will save.”

Gospel = good news - which includes the entire NT.
Grace is God’s undeserved favor.
I cannot define a sentence

No it isn’t. That’s a definition of how one is to love God according to the Law.

Are you sure?
Luke 10:25-28:

And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" And He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” And he answered, “YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” And He said to him, “You have answered correctly; **DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE.” **

I think the “LIVE” is a reference to eternal life, no? If so, and eternal life is "through faith " then this must also be a definition of faith, no? Im assuming we both agree it’s not a definition of grace.

Ahhhh. So now we get to the bottom of your “gospel.” For by grace (which you don’t define) you have been saved through your being FAITHFUL."

Not quite. Being faithful is how we *remain *abiding in Christ, it’s not how we “become” saved. It also is of God which we can choose to accept or reject.
But it is clear that you dissociate faith and faithfulness - a mistake in my opinion. Just for the record: Can you provide a single biblical example of someone who had salvation faith who was not also faithful?

We’re right back to LAW again. We’re right back to works. “Grace” is a Divine commodity and faithfulness is the work by which one merits it. That, my friend, is not the gospel (which also you refuse to define).

Perhaps my ability to communicate is not as clear as yours, but I will continue to try. You continue to object to the implication that grace is a divine commodity and that faithfulness “merits” it. But I never said that faithfulness “merits” grace - neither implicitly or explicitly. What I have said and what I continue to say is that “unfaithfulness” - if it is grave (idolatry) and unrepentant - merits not inheriting eternal life. That is why Paul said “Do not be deceived: nobody (who is an idolater) will inherit the kingdom of God” Do you see the difference? Faithfulness does not merit anything; unfaithfulness does. Here is a bad analogy:
Lets assume I wish to attend seminary. If judged objectively by my personal merits I am entirely unworthy. I am granted admission, however, based entirely upon the recommendation of someone of importance. Even though I have gained admission, there are conditions associated with remaining in the seminary program. And while there was nothing I could do to gain my admission apart from the recommendation, there are things I can do to get my butt booted out. If I do one of those bad things, I will be booted.
Distinction: My actions/merits do not grant me admission; they can, however, merit my being kicked out.
Before I leave this topic, I will point out that your message is not so very disimilar: Grace is a divine commodity and faith merits it. That still leaves you needing to retract your “How is grace still grace if it requires us to DO something”?

It’s a requirement for salvation but not a component of GRACE. Don’t confound faith and faithfulness.

Without meaning any disrespect I think you have a very attenuated, limited notion of what faith is. That notion appears to be a requirement of you “faith alone” soteriology. You somehow believe you can know your faith apart from your faithfulness - I simply disagree, and so did Christ, Paul, Peter and James.

1John:

The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him…

Yes,* believe *is something that we do. But SAVE is something God Himself does - perfectly and *completely *at the time of belief in the Lord Jesus.

Finally - after 10 pages of ducking you finally admit that faith(belief) - is something that WE DO. We must DO SOMETHING to be gifted eternal life. There’s no need to obfuscate with WHO does the saving or WHEN or any of the INCIDENTALS THAT WE DONT CONTROL. We need to focus on what WE DO to be saved and what, if anything, we need to AVOID DOING to jeopardize our salvation.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Indeed! They believe argue that God has saved us competely and perfectly the moment we believe - which I assume means that our past, present, and future sins have been forgiven at that very moment and for all eternity - and yet you have a verse like…

32But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world.

… which expressly states that the purpose of divine chastening is to prevent condemnation. If a person has been saved perfectly and completely when they believed, then why does God need to chasten them so that they are not condemned? Isn’t the divine and eternal declaration of acuittal from our sins sufficient to prevent condemnation, since an eternal acuqittal means absolutely no possibility of condemnation. And you pointed out a very good verse:

1 Tim 3: 6

6and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.

If he is a Christian and thus has been eternally acquitted from his sins the moment he believed, then why can’t he be a bishop? It’s not like becoming conceited is going to cause loss of salvation since that is impossible. And if he is not a genuine Christian, does it really matter? If he is not a true believer, then he is already condemned and hence cannot fall into a condemnation he has never escaped. Again, the express purpose (so that/ hina clause) of this is to prevent a new Christian from becoming conceited and thus falling into condemnation. So obviously Paul has true Christians in mind because the unbeliever is already “condemned.” If Paul truly believed in the eternal acquittal of the believer, then this makes absolutely no sense.

God bless,
Michael

:crying: It looks to me like even Paul couldn’t get the Gospel right. Sure he got SOME things right, but what do you call these passages? If it weren’t for the Reformers I don’t know where we’d be.:bowdown:

 

[ryanoneil]

And we keep the Commandments out of a NEW heartfelt love to please/obey our Lord … not in an attempt to merit our salvation ---- "lest any man boast’ … of his abilities, and get puffed up with pride.

Haven’t we all been saying this from the start. (in one way or another)

we are no longer under law from a legal standpoint, but we must still follow the godly principles of the Ten Commandments. (or our faith is dead)

Indeed someone might say, “You have faith and I have works.” Demonstrate your faith to me without works, and I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works. (James 2:18)

 

[Thing]

BRB:

…if we then ignore God [spitting on his commands, abasing the H.S.] … we have asked God for divorce and commit Apostasy. We get OUR WISH …

[we are] cut off of the Tree of Life.

Thats what I’ve been telling MD, if you break the Commandments you commit mortal sin.

 

[BRB]

Thats what I’ve been telling MD, if you break the Commandments you commit mortal sin.

Mortal sin is only mortal if unconfessed. Yes, certain sins are of major/mortal variety … that is beyond dispute.

But, if we confess … we will be forgiven of. However, we will still pay major Earthly penalties for committing Mortal sins that we confess. The longer we go w/o confession … the worse we make it for ourselves and others.

David committed murder and adultery, he confessed fully and promptly. Yet he had to pay a Major ‘earthly’ penalty for these offenses. And his children also suffered for David’s sins. Will David need purgatory too ?

Only Catholics know for sure …

 

[Philthy]

Hi BRB -
I asked MD,

How is grace still grace if it requires faith?

To which you responded…

Faith is often fleeting and not total commitment… …We have a supernatural, 24-7’spiritual channel’ we never had before.

And we keep the Commandments out of a NEW heartfelt love to please/obey our Lord … not in an attempt to merit our salvation ---- "lest any man boast’ … of his abilities, and get puffed up with pride.

Im not sure that you realize that* I* have no problem with “grace remaining grace” even though God has sovereignly linked it to the requirement of “faith”. There is no contradiction in my mind - only in MD’s mind. He was the one who objected to any “participation” on our part with salvation with his plea, "How can grace remain grace (if it requires our participation)? The answer, of course, is that grace remains grace and is entirely independent of our merits. Faith, however, requires our ongoing participation. Salvation, in that it is “by grace” AND “through faith” is something that we participate in. The interesting thing is that even our faith is contigent upon God’s grace! But God does not “impose” his grace upon us - he offers it as a gift - which requires the exercise of our free will to accept. He never retracts the gift, but we can - over time - reject it.
To tie it all back to the thread…Paul spoke extensively about actions (unrepented) which amount to a rejection of God’s gift and which forfeit eternal life. Here’s a sampling:

From the letter to the Galatians:“I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.”
From his first letter to the Corinthians: do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor {the} covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
From his letter to the Ephesians: no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.

Please note that the sins he mentions are all included in the 10 Commandments. The fact that we have patiently endured the twisting of the Gospel to mean we no longer should follow the Commandments is a testimony to our patience.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Mortal sin is only mortal if unconfessed. Yes, certain sins are of major/mortal variety … that is beyond dispute.

But, if we confess … we will be forgiven of. However, we will still pay major Earthly penalties for committing Mortal sins that we confess. The longer we go w/o confession … the worse we make it for ourselves and others.

David committed murder and adultery, he confessed fully and promptly. Yet he had to pay a Major ‘earthly’ penalty for these offenses. And his children also suffered for David’s sins. Will David need purgatory too ?

Only Catholics know for sure …

Close BRB - you are almost Catholic now.
Mortal sin is a mortal sin at the instant one commits it. At that instant one is immediately cut off from God’s friendship and is not in a relationship with God; nor is one any longer in God’s salvific grace (but God’s love still floods the soul with repentant grace, aka universal grace, to compel it to repent).

One in mortal sin is literally spiritually dead and if one dies in this state of sin unrepentant one goes to hell - no exceptions. Most people in the modern world are living in mortal sin but are so caught up in “the world” that they are indifferent to it and the symptoms. So, unrepented grave/mortal sin is TERMINAL. It is like getting gravely wounded by a rifle shot or contracting a terminal disease. It’s only a matter of time before one is unable to reverse the situation and hell is literally only a heart beat away (when one dies). Its a very precarious position for anyone to be lax about.

In mortal sin, one is still physically alive but one is gravely wounded in the “whole person”. The body is alive but the soul is gravely wounded and perishing - this in turn effects the physical and intellectual dimensions of ourselves as well (often manifesting itself as paranoia, contempt for authority, self loathing, apathy, self defeating behaviors, even real physical sickness etc.). In a state of mortal sin no person can do ANY good deed that merits them in the afterlife. Further EVERY good deed one has ever done in their life is forfeit and not considered before God’s judgement.

The good news for Catholics is that restoration to spiritual life is also only a heart beat away through sacramental confession and conditionally upon praying a perfect act of contrition with the intention of going to confession as soon as possible. Forgiveness restores one’s friendship with God, opens up new channels of grave, restores ALL prior life merits and makes it again possible to please God and do good works that will earn us greater rewards in heaven - assuming we persevere in grace till the finish line. However, mortal sin MUST be avoided since even when the soul is healed there remains a LOT of memory of that sin (a desire to repeat it through familiarity with it) and it may take a long penance and spiritual period of time to regain the same high level of grace and holiness as one previously may have had. Once innocence is lost it is very hard to regain and so it must be replaced with holiness through dedicated devotional prayer, personal penance and self mortification (fasting, self denial, alms giving, charity etc.). Our “humanness” thus makes it impossible to ever mock God through insincere repentance. That is, if one is not sincerely repentant the awoken concupiscence arising from the gravity of prior sins will pull us right back down again. AVOID mortal sin at all costs - its deadly! Also avoid frequent repetitions of venial sins as one would a mortal since since these really build up over time and can lead to mortal sin. Never give Satan a foothold. And if you do - get clean house fast.

I hope this helps clarifies things.

James

 

[moondweller]

Actually there is a difference. “Through faith” can certainly be viewed to be an ongoing event because faith endures, deepens, etc. When you substitute “at the time of belief” that is considerably more limited than the term “through faith”

No it isn’t. You’re adding conditions to it. Paul’s doctrinal statement to the Ephesian believers, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, …a gift of God, …not as a result of works” is no different than what he and his companions stated to the Philippian jailer when he asked what he must do to be saved: “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.” And Paul’s doctrinal statement to the Ephesian believers and answer to the Philippian jailer coincides with Christ’s own statement:John 3:16-18 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.God saves the one who believes in Christ. Divine salvation is gifted “through faith” (upon belief in Christ). The Philippian jailer believed in Christ and God saved. Paul didn’t say, “be faithful and hope to be saved.”

You corrupt this Divine message by turning it away from the Person of Christ to self. From “faith” to “faithfulness.” The former being objective, the latter subjective. The former unequivocal, the latter equivocal. The faith through which God saves is that which turns away from self completely and, as instructed in the gospel message, believes only in Another (someone other than himself). The gospel (good news) is about Jesus Christ.

Really? Is the gospel meaningless unless I think about it?

Of course. Even the word “gospel” is meaningless unless you think about what it means. The gospel message is actually propositional, and therefore requires you to make a decision, which requires thought.

Once again it sounds like it is dependent upon something I do - think.

It is dependent upon something you do: Believe. But in order to believe you must first think. The gospel is “reasonable.” As the Lord spoke to national Israel weighed down with iniquity:Is 1:18 “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the LORD, "Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool.This side of the cross the gospel message of the Person and work of Jesus Christ was presented first to the nation of Israel and then to a world in the same spiritual condition, with belief in Him causing the same results - only eternal.

That brings us back to the confusion you have regarding our need to cooperate through the exercise of free will with grace.

With your “cooperative” gospel you confuse law and grace, works and faith, faith and faithfulness. Again, your notion of having to “cooperate with grace” to achieve salvation defines grace as a Divine commodity rather than the means by which God Himself saves those who believe. “Faithfulness” to a sacramental system being the “currency” used to acquire the commodity.

Gospel = good news - which includes the entire NT.

No. It does not include the entire N.T. It is the message of “good news” concerning a Person and His finished, redemptive work on man’s behalf. A message delivered in propositional form: BELIEVE! (Jn. 3:18).

Grace is God’s undeserved favor.

Which means void of any merit.

I cannot define a sentence

You refuse to face the fact that it is God who saves, and that by His grace alone.

Are you sure?

Luke 10:25-28
And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” And He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” And he answered, “YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” And He said to him, “You have answered correctly; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE.”

Yes, I am sure. Please read what I underlined in bold type. Jesus was speaking to a Jewish “lawyer.” That is, one who is an expert in the Law of Moses. The whole conversation was within the context of “What is written in the Law.”

I think the “LIVE” is a reference to eternal life, no?

NO! The Law could not give life:Gal 3:21 “For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.The righteousness required for eternal life is nothing less than Divine righteousness; that which must be gifted to the believer (Rom. 3:24) now “in Christ,” having a righteousness not derived from law…”…but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which {comes} from God on the basis of faith,"Now take note, Phil. It’s “faith in Christ.” That’s “faith” vs. “no faith” in Christ. Those who seek for a righteousness based on law (such as the Decalogue), like the Jewish lawyer, exercise no faith in Christ. They may be faithful to a religious system (like the lawyer), but do not necessarily have “faith in Christ.”

Not quite. Being faithful is how we remain abiding in Christ, it’s not how we “become” saved.

But based on your own doctrine it is how you are “being saved” and will determine in the future IF you “will be saved.”

Define “saved.”

But it is clear that you dissociate faith and faithfulness - a mistake in my opinion. Just for the record: Can you provide a single biblical example of someone who had salvation faith who was not also faithful?

Peter was not always “faithful.” In fact, he had to be reprimanded by Paul. The difference is between faith and no faith. Though Peter was not always faithful, he did have faith in Christ. “Faith in Christ” not self, is the criterion by which God saves a sinner. It’s a turning away from self and trusting completely in Another.

Perhaps my ability to communicate is not as clear as yours, but I will continue to try. You continue to object to the implication that grace is a divine commodity and that faithfulness “merits” it. But I never said that faithfulness “merits” grace - neither implicitly or explicitly. What I have said and what I continue to say is that “unfaithfulness” - if it is grave (idolatry) and unrepentant - merits not inheriting eternal life.

And what you present here is a quintessential, SALVATION BASED ON LAW, the merit of one’s own “faithfulness” rather than Christ’s alone. You are no different than the Jewish lawyer who, in the context of law, asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life.” But the proposition of the gospel message, this side of the cross, is to believe or not believe in what Another has already done completely and perfectly for you. And by that faith alone, God saves, completely and perfectly. And yes, even “legally” because all the requirements for Him to save were completely and perfectly met in Christ. The offended holiness of God because of our sins was forever satisfied (propitiated) through the substitutionary, blood sacrifice of Christ. Divine salvation is based totally on His faithfulness, not ours. That’s why Paul said to the Philippian jailer, “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.” The Jewish lawyer, desiring to test Jesus, wanted to know what he himself could do to inherit eternal life. But the jailer, unlike the lawyer, convicted of sin, knew he needed salvation from the penalty of sin. He asked what he must do to be saved, and was told to “BELIEVE in the Lord Jesus.”

Distinction: My actions/merits do not grant me admission; they can, however, merit my being kicked out.

Translated: Saved by grace (however, “saved” is undefined by you), condemned by law. You have gone no further than the Jewish lawyer.

Without meaning any disrespect I think you have a very attenuated, limited notion of what faith is. That notion appears to be a requirement of your “faith alone” soteriology. You somehow believe you can know your faith apart from your faithfulness - I simply disagree, and so did Christ, Paul, Peter and James.

To the contrary, like Paul, “I know Whom I have believed” (2 Tim. 1:12). It’s “in whom” I have believed that matters. Consider what Paul said to the jailer: “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.” One cannot do this, nor can God do it, as long one continues to looks to self.

Finally - after 10 pages of ducking you finally admit that faith(belief) - is something that WE DO.

I have never denied it. Believe is what we do, SAVE is what God does - completely apart from what we do. It’s not a contradiction - you need to THINK about it.

 

[moondweller]

Close BRB - you are almost Catholic now.
Mortal sin is a mortal sin at the instant one commits it. At that instant one is immediately cut off from God’s friendship and is not in a relationship with God; nor is one any longer in God’s salvific grace (but God’s love still floods the soul with repentant grace, aka universal grace, to compel it to repent).

Then the cross has no power and Christ died needlessly.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Then the cross has no power and Christ died needlessly.

Say what?!
That’s a fallacy.

Listen, just because your personal non-apostolic theology (that we have consistently proven is contradicted by scripture) falls apart every time we Catholics mention a deeper dimension of our faith you don’t get a hall pass to fabricate these sort of false conclusions just to to make yours still work.

The cross has no power over those who do not willfully embrace it. God did not come to force salvation on man. Men were not all saved by the cross. What the cross did was make it possible for men to come to God and be forgiven of their sins and have an opportunity for eternal life.

So, sorry if that blows up any idea that God forces us all to be saved without our consent. Jesus can toss you the life preserver but its up to you to hold on and cooperate and not be so foolish as to put him to the test by swimming with the sharks and then wondering why you get eaten alive…

The cross is not a licence to sin!!

Jame

 

[moondweller]

The cross has no power over those who do not willfully embrace it.

I agree. But because of the cross, those who believe in Christ receive the forgiveness of sins.Acts 10:43 “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”

Acts 13:38 “Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you,”

Acts 26:18 “…to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness (i.e., through faith in Christ) to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.’”

Col 1:14 "…in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

1 John 2:12 “I am writing to you, little children, because your sins have been forgiven you for His name’s sake.” Why do you think the believer’s sins are all forgiven for Christ’s sake, James? If they’re not, what would say about His work on the cross?

God did not come to force salvation on man. Men were not all saved by the cross.

But the “good news” is that all who believe in Christ, because of the cross, receive forgiveness of sins. Salvation is not primarily a sin issue, but a belief issue.

What the cross did was make it possible for men to come to God and be forgiven of their sins and have an opportunity for eternal life.

What the cross did was provide the Divine means for God to, forever, forgive the sins of those who believe in the Sin bearer. The cross is the power behind God’s grace. God’s judgment against the believer has already been executed upon a Substitute, the news of which being called “The Gospel”, "good tidings."John 3:18 “He who believes in Him is not judged;”

So, sorry if that blows up any idea that God forces us all to be saved without our consent.

“Belief” is consent, is it not?

The cross is not a licence to sin!!

Absolutely!! But it does gives God the license, even the power, to forgive all who believe.

 

[BRB]

Mortal sin is a mortal sin at the instant one commits it. At that instant one is immediately cut off from God’s friendship and is not in a relationship with God; nor is one any longer in God’s salvific grace (but God’s love still floods the soul with repentant grace, aka universal grace, to compel it to repent).

One in mortal sin is literally spiritually dead and if one dies in this state of sin unrepentant one goes to hell - no exceptions.

Oh boy … now you have stirred the pot !!!

Lets review just a few of the Mortal sins … actually, any of the Big 10 right ? Adultery … just the ‘thought desire’ is a crime …per Christ. And fornication … who here has been able to avoid that one ? Who here has never missed a Sabbath @ God’s Church ? Do not steal … who here has ALWAYS given the full tithe ?

We are all mortal sinners … at one time or another. I agree that when we commit these sins … we suffer loss of H.S. Our tanks go to near empty. Yet, God desires us to repent …so some H.S. remains to convict us of sin and insist on confession/repentance. But, if someone had heart attack on a Sunday nite after missing Mass, etc … you believe God would not consider the short time interval since the sin ?

Remember Christ’s words … “ye without sin, come and cast the first stone”. And no one did. Christ knows us better than we know ourselves. He knows we all are fallable … on daily, even hourly basis. The best of us sins 7X’s before sundown.

I say he gives us ‘at least’ a 24 hr reprieve from hellfires. Probably much more. What if God knows a Catholic with Mortal sins intends to resolve the matter at next scheduled priest confessional ? Would not the Lord give that gent[or dame] a week to keep their promise ?

 

[BRB]

Mortal sin is a mortal sin at the instant one commits it. literally spiritually dead and if one dies in this state of sin unrepentant one goes to hell - no exceptions. a terminal disease.

In mortal sin, one is still physically alive but one is gravely wounded in the “whole person”. The body is alive but the soul is gravely wounded and perishing -

You are being inconsistent here. Look at these two paragraphs.

Are we ‘instantly dead’ and hellbound … or, is it the later case [gravely wounded, our fellowship with the Lord having suffered great loss] … yet given the chance/time to confess & recover ?

 

[Philthy]

Hi MD -

Thank you for your thoughtful and heartfelt responses.

Divine salvation is gifted “through faith” (upon belief in Christ). The Philippian jailer believed in Christ and God saved. Paul didn’t say, “be faithful and hope to be saved.”

I riterate that I disagree with your assessment of “through faith” and “at the point in time of belief”.
With respect to “be faithful and hope to be saved”, Paul absolutely said such things. The problem you continually have is you only focus on the FIRST conversation Paul has with his listeners. You have part of the message: “believe and be saved” but you ignore the rest of Pauls message regarding Christian conduct AFTER they have “believed”.

The faith through which God saves is that which turns away from self completely and, as instructed in the gospel message, believes only in Another (someone other than himself).

I dont believe in myself. I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ in me. In so far as I do live, I live by faith.

Even the word “gospel” is meaningless unless you think about what it means. The gospel message is actually propositional, and therefore requires you to make a decision, which requires thought.It is dependent upon something you do: Believe. But in order to believe you must first think.

No kidding, MD. This is is what I’ve been telling you for over 10 pages now. You dont need to point it out to me as if I having been saying it all along. Despite the fact that salvation is by grace alone, it requires us to DO things. Investigate, think, believe, etc…and none of that obviates grace. How amazing! Grace is still grace despite the fact that we have to DO something.

You refuse to face the fact that it is God who saves, and that by His grace alone.

You are delirious! I believe that it is God who saves and I believe that it is by His grace alone.

Yes, I am sure. Please read what I underlined in bold type. Jesus was speaking to a Jewish “lawyer.” That is, one who is an expert in the Law of Moses. The whole conversation was within the context of "What is written in the Law:

There are a number of problems with your assessment above. I dont have the time to address all of them.
The first problem is your claim that somehow Christ altered the answer because he was speaking to a Jewish lawyer. Christ never says anything to that effect. He merely asks the lawyer what he thinks the law says. The lawyers answer happens to be correct. Christ merely acknowledges this, he never indicates that the answer is “right for you, but not for my disciples” Thats pure fantasy born of your need to ignore another message that contradicts your notion of what the faith is that brings eternal life.
The second problem is your claim that the “Law could not give life”. It’s not that I disagree with the claim, but I never claimed “the Law gives life” and made no mention of the word “law”. You constantly bring it up - unprompted - for reasons that remain unclear. The context of our discussion is obeying the Commandments. In the particular exchange I quoted it is Christ himself who says that obeying the Commandments - loving God and neighbor as self - which gives life. “Do this and you will live” Those are his words, not mine. How many ways do you suppose we can interpret such a statement? I dont see that many - then again, I dont “need to” to justify a belief which his statement clearly contradicts. Do you think he lied to the lawyer - does obeying the Commandments not actually bring life? You dont need to bring other Scripture in to “refute” what Christ said - either he told the man the truth or he didnt. What’s your take on it?

"NO! The Law could not give life

This is the epitome of putting your theology into - and above - the text. The lawyer asks, plainly, “what must I do to inherit eternal life”. Christ says, "Do this (love God fully and neighbor as self) and you will live" And you somehow reach the conclusion that the “live” in Christ’s answer is not related to the “eternal life” in the lawyers question??? That is laughable IMHO, MD. The only way you could possibly arrive at such a conclusion is if you had a preconceived notion which prevented you from seeing the simple truth. Your problem is that you have equated “loving God and neighbor” as “the Law” when, in fact, neither of those things is technically in “The Law” Rather than having your usual “jerk-knee” response such as you did above, you should try contemplating how it could be that Christ would say such a thing if it weren’t true. When you do that you will find that you need to amend your concept of what the “Law” is, and you’ll be able reconcile Christs answer directly. Until then “answers” like the quote above detract from the validity of much of the good things you have to say.

Peter was not always “faithful.” In fact, he had to be reprimanded by Paul.

I didnt ask you if there was anyone who had salvation faith who was ever unfaithful , I asked you if there was anyone who had salvation faith who was not also faithful. I’ll save you the trouble: there is no one, because salvation faith and faithfulness are inseparable.

It’s a turning away from self and trusting completely in Another.

Now its your turn: define “turning” and “trusting”. And tell me how one “trusts” in Christ.

You are no different than the Jewish lawyer who, in the context of law, asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life.” But the proposition of the gospel message, this side of the cross,

Enough with the “this side of the cross” baloney. That lawyer was alive on both sides of the cross. You just dont like the answer Christ gave. The same message was given on this side of the cross as well. It’s not the whole message, of course, but its part of it. Get over it.

You have gone no further than the Jewish lawyer.

On the contrary - it is you who has gone no further than what is needed to “get saved”. Paul did, and so did all the other NT writers - they went much further. They talked about how Christian are to behave - what they are to do - what it means to have faith throughout your life - what to avoid so that you will spend eternity knowing God. Your message stops, Im afraid, at what a non-Christian needs to do to become a Christian.

(2.

Consider what Paul said to the jailer: “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.”

Consider it? Youve brought it up 400 times! Its time to move past this verse as if its the only one we need! It is only ONE of the MANY, MANY verses about eternal life. You like it because it’s the entirety of YOUR message. The problem is its not the ENTIRETY of the GOSPEL.

I have never denied it

I never said you denied it - I said that you have finally admitted it.
You avoided admitting it until you could not any longer and then you finally admitted it. No slack here my friend!

Believe is what we do, SAVE is what God does - completely apart from what we do. It’s not a contradiction - you need to THINK about it.

Roger!