The Commandments should not be followed ... Part 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter BRB
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Pax:
Moon has stated categorically that the ten commandments should not be followed. His reason for saying this is that we are “not under law period.”

***Moon…if I misrepresented you please correct me.
You’ve been corrected many times by me. Why would another one matter?
I believe this to be an error because scripture clearly says that we are under the “law of Christ” as expressed by Paul. James calls it the “royal law.” Both indicate that the law of Christ/royal law is written on the hearts of the Christian.
To “fulfill” the law of Christ and the royal law based on a believer’s behavior toward others (Gal. 6:2; Ja. 2:8) is not the same as placing oneself “under” law/the Law (the Decalogue) either for salvation or condemnation. Catholic soteriology in theory only) teaches salvation by grace through faith, but then condemns its people based on Law: Transgression of the 10, which it calls “mortal” sin.
The ten commandments are not followed as if they save us.
But you do teach that they must be followed so as not to condemn you. Thus, placing Catholics right back under the Law. This is the inconsistency of Catholic soteriology. And for this reason Catholicism emulates the Law by employing its own priesthood (connected to its sacramental system) and sacrifice.
 
So when God, supposedly, justified Abraham in Gen. 22, was he (Abraham) in a godly state or an ungodly state? Did he offer up Isaac in a state belief or unbelief? Was he, at that time, in a justified or unjustified state?
Abraham was a branch grafted into the tree when he offered Isaac up, when he offered him up God was pleased and caused the branch called Abraham to grow bigger and stronger.
 
Let’s change the wording and see how moondweller’s logic works on other things:
According to your opinion only, not divine, written Revelation. Can you show me in Scripture where -]any /-]-]church/-] (God the Father God the Son and the Holy Spirit ) is called “]the new Israel/-] (The Trinity)?”
 
So when God, supposedly, justified Abraham in Gen. 22, was he (Abraham) in a godly state or an ungodly state?
According to which standard would you like me to answer? The “recorded in Scripture” standard? If you wish to persist in that standard, the answer is it is not recorded. Apparently wasnt important enough to record. Let me know when your ready to drop the “recorded in Scripture” standard and our discussion will be far less constrained.
Did he offer up Isaac in a state of belief or unbelief?
I dont believe that is recorded either. Actually Im certain the term “state of belief” is unscriptural. We know he “believed God” regarding the promise, but “state of belief” is not to found.
What is recorded is that he was justified by works when he offered Isaac, that God was testing him and that after he offered Isaac God god knew his faith and blessed him. That’s what’s actually recorded.
Was he, at that time, in a justified or unjustified state?
Once again, this is not recorded - no mention of whether he was unjustified, partially justified or completely justified. It apparently wasnt as important to Moses or James as it is to you.
It is recorded that he was justified by belief in Gen 15; It is also recorded that he was justified in Gen 22 by the work of offering up Isaac. In addition, James points out that this latter justification is a fulfillment of his “belief being reckoned as righteousness”. One could certainly conclude that his justification in Gen 15 did not preclude further justification in Gen 22. But whether he went from being justified(Gen 15) to unjustified and justified again(Gen 22) or
whether he simply went from some initial state of justification(Gen 15) to additional justification (Gen 22) is not recorded.
Again, let me know when your ready to drop your “recorded in Scripture” standard - it’s really just amounts to “what do I believe Scripture means”. Unfortunately without it you’ll owe Pax some answers that I doubt are forthcoming regarding Abraham’s justification.
 
Hey MD -

I was hoping to get some clarification from you regarding the relationship of good works of believers and their heavenly rewards.
I’m pretty sure we’ve been down this road and you fell on the side of good works contributing to heavenly reward. Am I right?
“I dont know” is always acceptable…
I think its relevant to the question of “Should the Commandments be followed?” I thought that we all basically agreed that the Commandments(love of God and neighbor) should be followed, but for different reasons. I thought most non-Catholics agreed with the notion that our behavior effects our rewards in Heaven, but not our salvation, per se. Sandusky recently indicated that there are no eternal consequences - like less rewards - from our earthly behavior. What’s your take on it?
 
You’ve been corrected many times by me. Why would another one matter?To “fulfill” the law of Christ and the royal law based on a believer’s behavior toward others (Gal. 6:2; Ja. 2:8) is not the same as placing oneself “under” law/the Law (the Decalogue) either for salvation or condemnation. Catholic soteriology in theory only) teaches salvation by grace through faith, but then condemns its people based on Law: Transgression of the 10, which it calls “mortal” sin.But you do teach that they must be followed so as not to condemn you. Thus, placing Catholics right back under the Law. This is the inconsistency of Catholic soteriology. And for this reason Catholicism emulates the Law by employing its own priesthood (connected to its sacramental system) and sacrifice.
Excuse me…to my knowledge I have never misquoted you or misrepresented your position. If I did so in my paraphrase then please show it to me. Likewise, you are the one that specializes in the misrepresentation of what people say.

Your attempt to turn my statements around will not work.

**Sin and being led by the Spirit are incompatible.

The wages of sin is death.

The Spirit gives life.

Paul says that murderers, fornicators, and the like will not see eternal life.

That is because life in the flesh/sin is incompatible with life in the Spirit.

What part of this do you not understand?**
 
40.png
runandsew:
I don’t think Romans is saying that the sin issue has been dealt with as far as the believer is concerned - For it says "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”
I’m well aware of that, and well aware that Catholic theology teaches that the justified can lose their justification/salvation.
40.png
runandsew:
I think there is a difference between what you might consider a “believer” to be and what I consider “one who is in Christ” to be.
I’m certain of that; and, I’m equally certain that we have differing views of theology proper, the work and accomplishment of the Cross of Christ, and differing views of man.
40.png
runandsew:
Paul is writing to “believers” and is warning them that they must remain in Christ by living according the the Spirit, not to fall back into sin by living by the flesh.
I’m curious, runandsew, why you put “believers” in quotes?
40.png
runandsew:
He goes on to speak of the sanctifying grace we receive through the spirit to help us live in Christ. Keep in mind it is only by God’s grace that we can accomplish this, we absolutely can not do it own our own power

Paul is telling us to walk according to the spirit, and not to fall back into walking for the flesh. We walk according to the spirit, by conforming our life to God’s will and God’s law. This would be by obeying the 10 commandments which he later in Romans tells us – “The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.” --, not that the 10 commandments will save us, since they can not do so, but by obeying them we are submitting ourselves to God and becoming his slave. We need God’s sanctifying grace to do accomplish this, since we are drawn to sin by our flesh. And remember Paul tells us that love is greater than faith.

If you read Romans, you will see that Jesus conquered sin and death, but we must walk with him through the spirit to belong to him.
It is kind of the “talk the talk - walk the walk” mentality. But it is God that gives us the strength to walk the walk.

Romans 8:1-14
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, indeed it cannot; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, although your bodies are dead because of sin, your spirits are alive because of righteousness. If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit which dwells in you. So then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh – for if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.
All true.
 
I’m curious, runandsew, why you put “believers” in quotes?

All true.
To give emphasis to whom I am speaking of, and to whom Paul was speaking of and writing to.

Paul was writing to the Church of Rome to Christians who were already believers, I wanted to make the point that he was not addressing his letter at the time to unbelievers, plus I wanted to show a difference from a believer and someone who is in Christ.
All who are in Christ are believers, but not all believers are in Christ.
And this is what Paul is telling his audience, that they must remain in Christ, and not return to their life living in the flesh and in sin.
 
40.png
Pax:
It’s amusing that you would even choose to quote from Hebrews which says so much about judgment and punishment for sin.
Why does that amuse you?
40.png
Pax:
What you have quoted is only applicable to those that remain faithful.
You mean those whom He foreknew and whom He also predestined and whom He also called and whom He also justified and whom He also glorified—anyone who is justified is also glorified (I read a Catholic on the forum refer to that as the “eternal present” with respect to the “sacrifice” of the Eucharist).

Kind of makes one wonder about the “justification of baptismal regeneration.”
 
According to which standard would you like me to answer? The “recorded in Scripture” standard? If you wish to persist in that standard, the answer is it is not recorded. Apparently wasnt important enough to record. Let me know when your ready to drop the “recorded in Scripture” standard and our discussion will be far less constrained.

I dont believe that is recorded either. Actually Im certain the term “state of belief” is unscriptural. We know he “believed God” regarding the promise, but “state of belief” is not to found.
What is recorded is that he was justified by works when he offered Isaac, that God was testing him and that after he offered Isaac God god knew his faith and blessed him. That’s what’s actually recorded.

Once again, this is not recorded - no mention of whether he was unjustified, partially justified or completely justified. It apparently wasnt as important to Moses or James as it is to you.
It is recorded that he was justified by belief in Gen 15; It is also recorded that he was justified in Gen 22 by the work of offering up Isaac. In addition, James points out that this latter justification is a fulfillment of his “belief being reckoned as righteousness”. One could certainly conclude that his justification in Gen 15 did not preclude further justification in Gen 22. But whether he went from being justified(Gen 15) to unjustified and justified again(Gen 22) or
whether he simply went from some initial state of justification(Gen 15) to additional justification (Gen 22) is not recorded.
So then you’re saying that God just might justify the justified? That it is possible that God justifies the godly? Why would he need to do such a thing?
Again, let me know when your ready to drop your “recorded in Scripture” standard - it’s really just amounts to “what do I believe Scripture means”.Actually, I think it’s a matter of understanding what James means in context.

Unfortunately without it you’ll owe Pax some answers that I doubt are forthcoming regarding Abraham’s justification.

He still owes me an answer. How is it that both Paul and James quote ONLY Gen. 15:6?
 
Hey MD -

I was hoping to get some clarification from you regarding the relationship of good works of believers and their heavenly rewards.
I’m pretty sure we’ve been down this road and you fell on the side of good works contributing to heavenly reward. Am I right?
“I dont know” is always acceptable…
I think its relevant to the question of “Should the Commandments be followed?” I thought that we all basically agreed that the Commandments(love of God and neighbor) should be followed, but for different reasons. I thought most non-Catholics agreed with the notion that our behavior effects our rewards in Heaven, but not our salvation, per se. Sandusky recently indicated that there are no eternal consequences - like less rewards - from our earthly behavior. What’s your take on it?
Rewards are based on a Christian worker’s labors, i.e., how he builds upon the foundation of Jesus Christ (directly associated with one’s doctrines). Those works will be examined and their quality revealed (gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw) at the judgment seat of Christ (covered in 1 Cor. 3:10-15).1 Cor 3:14-15 "If any man’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.Even the motives will be considered (1 Cor. 4:5) But I am not sure what you mean by “behavior.” Sins (bad behavior?) will not be an issue at the judgment seat of Christ. That judgment was laid upon the Substitute, once for all. Both I (all who I was “in Adam”) and my sins were buried with Him.

One is not rewarded for “good behavior.” That’s simply expected.
 
Apocalypse 21

8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, they shall have their portion in the pool burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.

Matthew 19

18 He said to him: Which? And Jesus said: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness.

Matthew 18

3 And said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

3 Matthew 7

21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

4 Matthew 19

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples: Amen, I say to you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Mark 9

46 And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out. It is better for thee with one eye to enter into the kingdom of God, than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire:

29 Mark 10

24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus again answering, saith to them: Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches, to enter into the kingdom of God?

30 Mark 10

25 It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

31 Luke 18

25 For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5

21 Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God.

How many of the commandments can you break and still enter the kingdom of heaven - indeed not only can you not break them if you expect to enter but you must positively do something - become as little children, or you will not enter - far less receive any reward.
 
Catholic soteriology in theory only) teaches salvation by grace through faith, but then condemns its people based on Law: Transgression of the 10, which it calls “mortal” sin.But you do teach that they must be followed so as not to condemn you. Thus, placing Catholics right back under the Law. This is the inconsistency of Catholic soteriology. And for this reason Catholicism emulates the Law by employing its own priesthood (connected to its sacramental system) and sacrifice.
Code:
I don't think you understand what St. Paul was speaking of when He said Jewish Christians were no longer "under the Law".
 The law of Moses consisted not only in the moral law, the 10 commandments, but a civil law and a ceremonial or ritual law.   This was because when the Israelites came out of Egypt they had no civil law. So Moses gave them a civil law.  Then they also had to have a way to worship, and how to administer those under the Jewish religion, thus, they had a ceremonial and ritual law.
Now the moral law, the 10 commandments are just part of the natural law which applies to everyone, even pagans.  Thus, stealing, murder, adultery, etc are wrong and were wrong for everyone, not only the Israelites.    God gave the Israelites the 10 commandments so that they could know clearly and explicitly the moral law written on everyone's hearts.
    Jesus came and gave the Law of the Gospel. As the Catechism states   "The Law of the Gospel fulfills the commandments of the Law. The Lord's Sermon on the Mount, **far from abolishing or devaluing the moral prescriptions of the Old Law, **releases their hidden potential **and has new demands arise from them."**
Thus the Law of the Gospel did not abolish the moral law.
But, since the Law of the Gospel would not apply only to Jews but to all nationalities, it no longer had civil laws. Each country would have their own civil laws. Since the Law of the Gospel had different ways of worship and a new source of grace, the grace of salvation, which frees us (saves us) from the slavery of sin, then it had new ceremonial laws.
Notice JESUS DID NOT ABOLISH THE LAW OF MOSES.
The law of Moses still existed and the Jews were still under the Law of Moses.
But when a Jew became a Christian, then he was no longer “under the law” of Moses. Now he was under the Law of the Gospel.
Just as when a person moves from California to Mississippi, after a year or so, he is no longer under the laws of California. He is now under the laws of Mississippi. Does that mean the state of Mississippi will no longer prosecute him for murder, if he commits murder. Of course not. Some laws in both states are the same.
In the same way, while the Law of the Gospel no longer had the civil laws and same ceremonial laws (which were replaced by the sacraments and new ways of worship) the moral law remained and even had new demands arise from it.
Thus while Christians were no longer under the law of Moses, they were still under the Law of the Gospel. The law of the Gospel still had the moral law. It is still wrong to commit murder, etc, even if one is a Christian. That is why in every book of the new Testament, on judgment day, those who continued in sin and did not repent would still end up in hell. That is why in Galatians 5:19-20 St. Paul told those Christians that if they did not quit their mortal sins, such as fornication, etc, they would NOT go to heaven.
So we come to the matter of salvation.
When Adam sinned and lost sanctifying grace, he became under the bondage of sin. He and the whole human race became slaves to sin. That means that all men are inclined to sin. This is called concupiscence.
Now as the Catechism teaches,
1963. According to Christian tradition, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good,[[14]](file:///home/dennis/Documents/Church%20Docs/CATECHISM%20OF%20THE%20Catholic%20Church.html#18G14) yet still imperfect. Like a tutor[[15]](file:///home/dennis/Documents/Church%20Docs/CATECHISM%20OF%20THE%20Catholic%20Church.html#18G15) it shows what must be done, but does not of itself give the strength, the grace of the Spirit, to fulfill it. Because of sin, which it cannot remove, it remains a law of bondage. According to St. Paul, its special function is to denounce and disclose sin, which constitutes a “law of concupiscence” in the human heart.[[16]](file:///home/dennis/Documents/Church%20Docs/CATECHISM%20OF%20THE%20Catholic%20Church.html#18G16) However, the Law remains the first stage on the way to the kingdom. It prepares and disposes the chosen people and each Christian for conversion and faith in the Savior God. It provides a teaching which endures for ever, like the Word of God.
Thus, the law of Moses could not free anyone from this slavery to sin, that is it could not save them from this slavery to sin. It could not free them i.e. save them, from this inclination to sin. It could not free, save them, them from this concupiscence. The law of Moses could not confer the grace to save anyone from this inclination to sin. Everyone was still under bondage, or slavery to sin. While they could still receive some grace through prayer, it was not enough to free them, that is save them, from this bondage to sin. They could still repent, thus escape the fires of hell, but they were still without the grace to free them from the slavery of sin, so that they could live the way God wanted them to live.
Jesus came to save everyone from this slavery to sin. He came to restore everyone to the state of grace that Adam had before he sinned. Jesus came to undo what Adam had done. “You shall name Him Jesus, for he will save men from their sins” the angel told Joseph. Thus, Jesus came to free us from our slavery to sin, that is save us, thus giving us the gift of salvation.
The Church defines salvation as “this great gift of God which is liberation from everything that oppresses man but which is above all liberation from sin and the Evil One, in the joy of knowing God and being known by Him, of seeing Him, and of being given over to Him.”
**Evangelium nuntiandi **
Pope Paul VI
So Jesus suffered and died to give us the grace which frees us from bondage, from being slaves to sin.
And of course, the Church teaches we receive this grace that frees us from the slavery to to sin though the sacraments. First baptism. But since baptism does not remove all of our inclination to sin, Jesus gives us other sacraments, especially the Eucharist, which more fully frees us from the slavery to sin. That is why the mass is so important. It continues and makes present the work of salvation, the work of the cross, in which Jesus gives us more of the grace of salvation to free us from the slavery of sin.
A savior is one who saves, that is frees us. Thus the acclamation at mass says, “By your cross and resurrection you have set us free, you are the savior of the world.”
Code:
Of course, if we continue to  obey Jesus by means of His grace and live the way we should then this salvation, this liberation from sin, will continue till the next life where we will have final salvation, since the grace of salvation also atones for our sins and makes us righteous, children of God, and gives us the right to heaven. 

Luther had to restrict salvation almost entirely to final salvation to justify his new theory of "faith alone".   Thus, most protestants think by salvation, the bible means final salvation, or going to heaven. Thus many think that being saved means being assured of going to heaven.  This is wrong. Being saved, means PRIMARILY being freed from the inclination to sin.
Notice how Jesus describes His mission, in terms of liberation from the slavery of sin, and NOT primarily final salvation, or going to heaven.
First defininition of “save”:
“to rescue, or free, from injury or danger.”
“for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world” John 12:47 **
Thus, Jesus came to free us from our slavery to sin.
“Christ came into the world to save sinners”
1Tim 1:15
Thus, Jesus came to free us from our slavery to sin.
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
Ephesians 2:8
Thus, Jesus came to free us from our slavery to sin. We cannot free ourselves from this slavery to sin. The Law of Moses could not free us from this slavery to sin. Only Jesus could merit the grace that saves us, frees us from this slavery to sin.
Jesus answered them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. ** John 8:34

Code:
                              “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.”
John 8:36

(Jesus came to free us, save us, from the slavery to sin)

“For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." Mark 10:45

"Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. " Matthew 20: 28

To ransom means to free a slave, prisoner, or a captive in return for something of value. By His suffering and death out of love, Jesus earned the grace that frees us from being a slave to sin, from being a prisoner to sin, from being a captive to sin, from being blinded by sin, from being oppressed by sin.

Thus He considers Himself to be a ransom (something of value given to free a captive from being a slave or prisoner. ) Jesus considers us all as prisoners to sin, as slaves of sin.

“He has sent me to proclaim liberty to captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free,”** Luke 4:18. **

Sin oppresses us. Thus Jesus came to free us from the oppression of sin.

“Our old self was crucified with him so that…we might no longer be enslaved to sin” Romans 6:6

Notice how St. Paul continues the teaching of Jesus. That sin enslaves us, but that through the crucifixion was might no longer be enslaved to sin.
Code:
  .
But, while this grace frees us from the slavery of sin, it does not do so entirely. We still have some inclination to sin. We can remove most of this inclination through the sacraments and prayer, especially daily mass. But we still need to fast, perform mortifications, use private prayers such as the rosary, etc. to further free us from this slavery to sin. That is why Paul exhorts Christians to pray, “mortify the deeds of the flesh”, fast, etc.

And all this grace does not force us to obey God. It frees us from the slavery of sin, and it increases our love of God, but we still have a free will. We can still freely choose to sin, thus rebel against God and lose our salvation.
Code:
There are already numerous posts showing how Jesus and St. Paul both taught we can lose our salvation, lose the grace that frees us from the slavery to sin, lose this grace that gives us the right to heaven by our rebellion against God when we sin.
Thus, through grace and obedience Christians can live the way Jesus wants us to live, thus be members of the Kingdom of God, and when we die, enter heaven.
Code:
Now some Jewish Christians taught that this grace and obedience was not enough.  They taught that Christians also had to follow the law of Moses, specifically the ceremonial laws of circumcision.    But, since Christians were  no longer under the law of Moses, then following the ceremonial laws was NOT obedience to God, thus it could not lead to final salvation.   These Jewish Christians taught that men had to do something in addition to having faith and obedience to God.  They had to earn their salvation on their own, without God.
But Paul pointed out that the law of Moses could not save them, that is, it could not give them the grace that freed them from their slavery to sin.  Thus it was useless to go back to the law of Moses.   Even when they were under the  the law of Moses, it could not  save them, that is free them from the slavery to sin.   If it could, then Jesus died for nothing.
Thus, St. Paul makes it clear that it was only through grace and obedience to God that we can be freed from our sins and continue in holiness that will one day lead to final salvation in heaven. Those parts of the law of Moses which were not continued in the law of the Gospel were useless for our salvation. And those who made up a new man made teachings that demanded that Christians go back and be circumcised were voiding the cross of Christ. Thus it is only through faith in Jesus and obedience to His laws that we can be saved from our slavery to sin starting in this life and being fulfilled in the next life in heaven.
 
40.png
runandsew:
Paul was writing to the Church of Rome to Christians who were already believers, I wanted to make the point that he was not addressing his letter at the time to unbelievers, plus I wanted to show a difference from a believer and someone who is in Christ.
That’s another question I have. Is it your contention that everyone attending the church of Rome at the time of the writing of the epistle was truly a Christian?
 
Apocalypse 21

8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, they shall have their portion in the pool burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.

Matthew 19

18 He said to him: Which? And Jesus said: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness.

Matthew 18

3 And said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

3 Matthew 7

21 Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.

4 Matthew 19

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples: Amen, I say to you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Mark 9

46 And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out. It is better for thee with one eye to enter into the kingdom of God, than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire:

29 Mark 10

24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus again answering, saith to them: Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches, to enter into the kingdom of God?

30 Mark 10

25 It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

31 Luke 18

25 For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5

21 Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God.

How many of the commandments can you break and still enter the kingdom of heaven - indeed not only can you not break them if you expect to enter but you must positively do something - become as little children, or you will not enter - far less receive any reward.
So breaking a commandment excludes you from heaven? Explain.
 
So then you’re saying that God just might justify the justified? That it is possible that God justifies the godly? Why would he need to do such a thing?
Scripture records that Abraham was justified by believing God
Scripture records that Abraham was justified by works.
Scripture records the two events occuring at different times.
I dont need to say anything, but I can understand your confusion.
Actually, I think it’s a matter of understanding what James means in context.
I know this, and I know that you know it as well.
The problem has been two-fold:
  • you attempted to defend your justification stance(and entirely dismissed Pax’s thoughtful stance) entirely on your false “What’s recorded in Scripture?” standard.
  • you denied - ooops! let me change that - you failed to admit that what you were really relying on was your interpretation of Scripture, not merely what was recorded…
He still owes me an answer. How is it that both Paul and James quote ONLY Gen. 15:6?
Is this your new standard now that you can no longer pretend to hold the “recorded in Scripture” standard that has exposed your hypocrisy? Why does quoting vs paraphrasing change anything? Does a quote somehow alter the “context” that you referenced above? It changes nothing, of course. Unfortunately, this question reveals that you continue to return to square one.
I’ll offer you my answer to your question. They both quote it, but for different reasons.
Paul quotes it to make the point that justification requires faith, not merely works. This was a difficult message for the Jews and Paul is pointing out Abraham - the father of the Jews - was justified prior to the revelation of the Law to Moses. If that happened how could justification be completely dependent on the works of the Law? That’s his point - you must have faith!
James quoted it because some Christians had misinterpreted Paul and the other Apostles. They apparently were of the opinion that once they were “saved” their conduct no longer mattered. They believed that believing in their own faith - in their hearts and minds - was good enough, and they could always point to Abraham as being perfectly, completely and irrevocably justified before God by “belief”. Some had grown lukewarm and complacent. Even worse, some had actually embraced a sinful lifestyle as the ultimate testimony of their “faith” in Christ’s atoning sacrifice which covered their sins past, present and future. They were saying things like, “Shall we cower in fear of retribution for sin? No! Let us sin boldly so that grace may abound all the more!” James corrects them by revealing that our works justify us and that apart from doing good no one has any reason to believe that they have faith. He brings up the issue of Abraham offering Isaac and “quotes” Gen 15:6 in order to unequivocably link the two events as being one with respect to justification. He did this so that they could no longer deny that faith requires action when it is offered the opportunity. He did it to clarify that action flowing from faith justifies us whereas faith, if it is alone, is incomplete, dead, unjustifying and wont save you.
As further support for my interpretation, Paul himself delivered exactly the same message when he told believers “Do not be deceived…” and went on to list the behaviors that are incompatible with the kingdom of God.
 
To “fulfill” the law of Christ and the royal law based on a believer’s behavior toward others (Gal. 6:2; Ja. 2:8) is not the same as placing oneself “under” law/the Law (the Decalogue) either for salvation or condemnation. Catholic soteriology in theory only) teaches salvation by grace through faith, but then condemns its people based on Law: Transgression of the 10, which it calls “mortal” sin.But you do teach that they must be followed so as not to condemn you. Thus, placing Catholics right back under the Law. This is the inconsistency of Catholic soteriology. And for this reason Catholicism emulates the Law by employing its own priesthood (connected to its sacramental system) and sacrifice.
Fulfilling the law of Christ entails avoiding those sins prohibited by the Decalogue. Please explain to us how you fulfill the Law of Christ without avoiding the sins of stealing, murder, adultery, etc? Please explain how you can love God without keeping His commandments?

1 John 5:3

3For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.

2 John 6

6And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, that you should walk in it.

Please explain to us how you can have saving faith without having the love of God, without fulfilling the Law of Christ?

James 2:5

**5Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? **

James 2:12-14

**12So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty.
13For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.
14What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? **

Matthew 5:7

7"Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.

A faith that works through love automatically translates into holy conduct, to the keeping of God’s commandments. That’s why the following two verses are remarkably similar:

Galatians 5:6

**6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love. **

1 Corithians 7:18

19Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God.

And it is through a faith working through love - which entails keeping God’s commandments - that sanctification in a Christian is accomplished, the sanctification without which *no one *will see the Lord (Hebrews 12:14).

Romans 6:19

**19I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification. **

Galatians 6:7-9

**7Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.
8For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.
9Let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due time we will reap if we do not grow weary. **

If you have a faith that works through love, you bear fruit. If you don’t have a faith that works through love, you don’t have fruit (John 15:2, 2 Peter 1:8-9). Please explain how you reconcile fruitless genuine Christians with your view of James 2?

God Bless,
Michael

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top