The Lord`s prayer

[Dulcinea2721]

. He knows if we have the kind of faith that James talked about, the faith that leads to love expressed through good works. If we don’t have that kind of faith then we don’t have faith at all.

I agree.

Many non catholic people disagree with that statement. Like I have said before, many people I talk to think that what they do on earth has nothing to do with their faith and salvation. The declaration, either through baptist or statement of acceptance of Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Saviour is all they require. Murder, abortion, adultery, contraception you name it.

As you have previously stated, you would not consider them true Christians, however they consider themselves just as Christian anyone else.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Sorry, no. The whole topic of this thread is forgiveness. Yes, I know the notorious nature of going off topic, but that is what I was directly referring to; our forgiveness of sin.

Perhaps, but in context, the issue regarding Purgatory is NOT forgiveness.
Like I said (did you skip over it? Yu quoted it.): People in Purgatory are forgiven already. So, your premise is incorrect to begin with.

His work is the only efficacious work, and that is true even when we do “good works” through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Nope. The work of the Holy Spirit through us is indeed efficacious.

Jas 2:24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

He gets all the glory for suffering, and He is the one that also took all punishment, temporal and its eternal effects, for us.

See, your beliefs are in conflict with scripture:
Col 1:24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,

Will you ignore these scriptures also?

My statement lines up exactly; works tried, person fine.

Person fine, AFTER passing through fire.
Does passing through fire happen in Heaven? NO!
Is “person fine” in Hell? NO!
What is left? Well, a place of temporal cleansing. Hmmm … can we think of a name for a state where were are purged of these effects of sin?

I don’t get what you are trying to get at here. There is the unforgivable sin, no one can faithe for me. Sure, people can pray for one another; we are commanded to do so, but if they are saved, it is because they bend their will to God’s will and turn to Him.

Please read this and remember it:
Purgatory is NOT about salvation.
If a person is in Purgatory, they are saved. Period.
It is a state of cleansing of the soul so they may “attain the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.” [Heb 12:14]
When most of us die, we are not in a state of perfect holiness. If we want to see the Lord, we must attain perfect holiness.

If they don’t, nothing I do or don’t do will matter a hill of beans.

Scripture says that prayers are efficacious in the forgiveness of non-mortal sins.
Don’t be upset that Catholics teach that; we get it right from the Apostles and scripture.

If someone is going around blaspheming the Holy Spirit, I’m not going to pray that God forgive them for that , but I can pray that they get put in every possible situation where they may repent.

That’s nice, but irrelevant. See the part above that I asked you to read and commit to memory.

You know very well that most protestants see no evidence of a place of Purgatory (and the Orthodox see it differently as well), but rather purgation of a different sort than the RCC does, and we see our belief clearly backed up by scripture. That you disagree with that, and I disagree with the RCC position is a given.

 

[Dulcinea2721]

Sorry, no. The whole topic of this thread is forgiveness. Yes, I know the notorious nature of going off topic, but that is what I was directly referring to; our forgiveness of sin.

.

Sorry there, the whole topic of this thread id the Lord`s prayer, ergo title.

I wanted to know why some protestants claim to be forgiven (past present and future) by the Christ , yet will say forgive us our sins in the present tense in the prayer…it did not make sense to me…why not say thank you for having forgiven us our sins.

The second part was the forgiving others, which is like a work. My understanding is that many protestants do not believe that any works are necessary. So the thought kept floating in my mind `Do they forgive others? do they have to ? is it optional? does it matter?.

Some people have responded that their sect does not recite the our Father because they interpret the bible as giving an example of how to pray and not a dictation. That makes sense to me because they are not claiming to abide by that in their life, even though I do not agree.

 

[Kliska]

Perhaps, but in context, the issue regarding Purgatory is NOT forgiveness.
Like I said (did you skip over it? Yu quoted it.): People in Purgatory are forgiven already. So, your premise is incorrect to begin with.

No, sorry. Two different talks of Purgatory and two different talks on forgiveness. Purgatory is about purgation, but is also about temporal punishment. The fact that most protestants see in scripture is that Jesus’ suffering and sacrifice were totally necessary and sufficient for all of the above. The suffering He suffered was temporal and also eternally efficacious. He took the sin, He took the punishment, He suffered as no one else, as God the Son, so that we don’t require Purgatory or Hell. Forgiveness is included in lot.

Nope. The work of the Holy Spirit through us is indeed efficacious.

Jas 2:24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Like I just said; it is God’s work, not man’s. God’s work is always efficacious.

See, your beliefs are in conflict with scripture:
Col 1:24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,

Will you ignore these scriptures also?

First, I don’t ignore scripture. What I do is exercise both my right and my responsibility not to break the rules of this board. I’m not here to proselytize or to bash the RCC’s understanding of certain teachings. This thread was specifically asking a protestant perspective on certain teachings, that is what I’m offering. When someone asks me to answer something that would put me in opposition to my intent, or the intent of this board, I try not to cross that line. You see, here is proof I believe in temporal consequences and eternal consequences of the words we utter, and how we treat others.

This proves you are not reading my replies in this thread to others as well; this suffering is actual temporal and current suffering, on behalf of the body that is living here and now. We are called to fill in the gap left by Jesus’ physical ascension and become His hands, feet, and mouth here and now, even to the point of torture and death.

Person fine, AFTER passing through fire.

That isn’t what it says. Works pass through fire, person fine. This happens at death, we don’t enter Heaven with bad works hanging around our neck, nor do we enter heaven in fallen flesh. The first is purged at death upon meeting our Maker, the second is purged upon resurrection.

Please read this and remember it:
Purgatory is NOT about salvation.
If a person is in Purgatory, they are saved. Period.

That is a basic teaching of the RCC, I’m well aware.

When most of us die, we are not in a state of perfect holiness. If we want to see the Lord, we must attain perfect holiness.

And there is the key difference; Jesus already attained it on our behalf; Blood and Spirit cleanses us, works put through the fire, bad burned away, good rewarded, body changed at resurrection.

Scripture says that prayers are efficacious in the forgiveness of non-mortal sins.
Don’t be upset that Catholics teach that; we get it right from the Apostles and scripture.

I don’t really mind what the Catholics teach. However, it is a matter of opinion whether what the RCC’s teach lines up with the truth. If I thought it did, I’d be Catholic.

 

[Kliska]

Sorry there, the whole topic of this thread id the Lord`s prayer, ergo title.

That’s alright, I see how we got to where we did in the conversation. lol It does all connect to be sure.

I wanted to know why some protestants claim to be forgiven (past present and future) by the Christ , yet will say forgive us our sins in the present tense in the prayer…it did not make sense to me…why not say thank you for having forgiven us our sins.

I may be able to add to the understanding here; we too believe that certain things are ongoing, not just “stuck in time.” So, as others sin against us, we are currently called to forgive those in each past moment, present moment, and future moment. So the words would be applicable day-to-day; such as “give us this day our daily bread.”

The second part was the forgiving others, which is like a work. My understanding is that many protestants do not believe that any works are necessary. So the thought kept floating in my mind `Do they forgive others? do they have to ? is it optional? does it matter?.

I hope you got to see my response upthread to this; I see the forgiveness of others as an integral sign of a true inward change and repentance toward God. If one doesn’t forgive others it shows that on some level they do not acknowledge their own sin, which is problematic for salvation from my perspective. We can’t turn to the Great Physician if we don’t realize the level of our own sickness and wish to be healed from it.

Some people have responded that their sect does not recite the our Father because they interpret the bible as giving an example of how to pray and not a dictation. That makes sense to me because they are not claiming to abide by that in their life, even though I do not agree.

True.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

No, sorry. Two different talks of Purgatory and two different talks on forgiveness. Purgatory is about purgation, but is also about temporal punishment. The fact that most protestants see in scripture is that Jesus’ suffering and sacrifice were totally necessary and sufficient for all of the above. The suffering He suffered was temporal and also eternally efficacious. He took the sin, He took the punishment, He suffered as no one else, as God the Son, so that we don’t require Purgatory or Hell. Forgiveness is included in lot.

Other than your misconception about Catholic beliefs in Purgatory, I can agree with that.

Purgatory’s “punishment” is prescriptive. Like many things that are good for us, it can be painful, “like escaping through fire.”

First, I don’t ignore scripture.

You seem to skip over it with no attempt to harmonize it with your beliefs here, at any rate.

What I do is exercise both my right and my responsibility not to break the rules of this board. I’m not here to proselytize or to bash the RCC’s understanding of certain teachings.

You CAN do it with a modicum of charity.

This proves you are not reading my replies in this thread to others as well; this suffering is actual temporal and current suffering, on behalf of the body that is living here and now. We are called to fill in the gap left by Jesus’ physical ascension and become His hands, feet, and mouth here and now, even to the point of torture and death.

Are you’re saying that the suffering of the Church on Earth has only temporal consequences?

That isn’t what it says. Works pass through fire, person fine.

Noope, the sentence doesn’t parse out that way.
1Co 3:15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

Who or what suffers loss? NOT the works; HE will.
Who will be saved? NOT the works; HE will.
So, to what does the “only as through fire” refer?

That is a basic teaching of the RCC, I’m well aware.

Sorry. Your arguments seemed to show otherwise, since you were conflating salvation with the effects of Purgatory.

And there is the key difference; Jesus already attained it on our behalf; Blood and Spirit cleanses us, works put through the fire, bad burned away, good rewarded, body changed at resurrection.

Yes, and the person is “saved, but only as through fire.”
Again, does this happen in Heaven?

I don’t really mind what the Catholics teach. However, it is a matter of opinion whether what the RCC’s teach lines up with the truth. If I thought it did, I’d be Catholic.

I’m looking forward to that day …

 

[FathersKnowBest]

So the words would be applicable day-to-day; such as “give us this day our daily bread.”

This, I feel, is a sad effect of a poor translation on St. Jerome’s part.

The actual word, epiousios, is a hapax legomenon (a technical Greek term meaning “a word used only once”); it doesn’t occur anywhere else in scripture, nor anywhere else in Greek literature prior to the Christian age.

It’s a compound word, consisting of the prefix epi-, (meaning over, above, beyond, “super”), and ousia (substance).
From studying this, I’m of the belief that the word CAME TO MEAN “daily” since it was analogous to the “daily bread” that God gave to the Israelites – the manna. Which, of course, was what Christ related His own flesh to.

The first meaning, I’m convinced, is the meaning that St. Jerome gave it in the Vulgate: “supersubstantial”. Even he, though, “split the difference” rendering the word as quotidianum (daily) in Luke’s Gospel, and chosing supersubstantialem in his translation of the exact same word in Matthew.

Perhaps it had multiple meanings (like anothen which means “again” and/or “above” in the famous “born again” passage), but it certainly seems like it at least means supersubstantial.

Give us this day our supersubstantial bread.

It was a Eucharistic plea to God.

 

[Dulcinea2721]

I wanted to know why some protestants claim to be forgiven (past present and future) by the Christ , yet will say forgive us our sins in the present tense in the prayer…it did not make sense to me…why not say thank you for having forgiven us our sins.

I may be able to add to the understanding here; we too believe that certain things are ongoing, not just “stuck in time.” So, as others sin against us, we are currently called to forgive those in each past moment, present moment, and future moment. So the words would be applicable day-to-day; such as “give us this day our daily bread.”

 

[Kliska]

I was asking specifically if you need to ask for forgiveness or did Christ forgive and pay our sins in full past present and future. This part of the question does not relate so much to forgiving others.

Ahhh, I see. It would still kind of be the same as I’m explaining; we are to confess our sin even if forgiven at the moment of the crucifixion, so to speak. Our actions and thoughts change daily, and we are even to “confess our sins one to another.” Many of us would see the first “repenting,” the one that puts us into Christ as being the point when all our personal sin is forgiven us, past, present and future as they are all put on Christ at the time of the crucifixion, but we mere humans are creatures in time, Again, this would probably be a split between a protestant idea of salvation, and of sanctification.

It is the realization and the admittance of one’s state as a sinner, and a turning to God away from self and sin and calling on His name and faithing on Him, that is salvation. The ongoing refining process I would consider sanctification and that includes prayer, confession, etc…

I understand what you are saying, this is why I asked you earlier in the thread about what exactly you considered works. I got the feeling that in your mind works were limited to working at the soup kitchen and tending to the elderly. Forgiving is a work.

Could it be that faith without works is dead because true faith works?

Biblically, forgiving is an action, not a work. Faith without works is dead because if faith is trust, which it is, the concept of trusting with no showing forth is kind of impossible. Did the thief on the cross show forth his faith… yeah, I think he did. In short, Jesus explains that working the works of God is faithing on Him Whom He hath sent; trusting Jesus. But if I truly trust Jesus I’ll do what He says through the power of the Holy Spirit. It’s still the faith that taps into grace, but you don’t stop there because it makes no sense. Abraham had faith, but he also got up and went.

 

[Dulcinea2721]

Biblically, forgiving is an action, not a work. Faith without works is dead because if faith is trust, which it is, the concept of trusting with no showing forth is kind of impossible. Did the thief on the cross show forth his faith… yeah, I think he did. In short, Jesus explains that working the works of God is faithing on Him Whom He hath sent; trusting Jesus. But if I truly trust Jesus I’ll do what He says through the power of the Holy Spirit. COLOR=“black”]It’s still the faith that taps into grace, but you don’t stop there because it makes no sense

. Abraham had faith, but he also got up and went.

The result of an action or an effort is a work by definition. If we agree that works and faith are intricately related why do they get separated?

Like you said you don;t stop there because it makes no sense.(in red above)

When I hear certain protestants profess faith and act inappropriately, I do not get the impression that they understand that faith and works are linked. IMO that is the peril in stating so emphatically that faith alone is needed firstly is separates it from works and secondly it gives the impression that works are unimportant, optional, discretionary etc.

For example, a pastor had children with 2 different men out of wedlock, purposely and intentionally (she planned it that way). When I asked her if she thought it was odd that the bible which she uses as her guide shuns adultery and yet she chose this path…she looked at me like I had 2 heads. She was absolutely convinced that because she had faith she need not do anything. I wonder if she would feel obliged to “forgive those who trespass against us” or not feel required to do that either, I will let you know what she says next time I see her.

 

[Kliska]

The result of an action or an effort is a work by definition.

Not according to the way they saw it from a Jewish Covenant perspective. Again, as an example, no working on the Sabbath, but they were allowed to breathe, to think, to talk, to imagine, to trust, to love, etc… We have to go back to the Hebrew and the Greek to get a clear picture of what is actually being communicated.

If we agree that works and faith are intricately related why do they get separated?

To be honest, I’ve not met a protestant that separates them. Our emphasis tends to be on the works of God, rather than man. God’s grace, man’s faith, it is clear that the grace flows to us via faith. Now, faith and works are a different issue. Protestants tend not to separate faith and works, but rather differentiate between Salvation and Sanctification. To someone like me, it is very very important to emphasis anything and everything good is done under the power and grace of God, hence the focus becomes a bit different in explaining things.

Like you said you don;t stop there because it makes no sense.(in red above)

It’s like saying you want to fly to Hawaii, and that you trust the plane and the captain, yet you don’t get on the plane. From the outside, from me looking on, it would leave me believing you don’t really trust it, all things being equal. If Abraham said he trusted God, yet if he would never do anything God asked, that wouldn’t compute.

When I hear certain protestants profess faith and act inappropriately, I do not get the impression that they understand that faith and works are linked. IMO that is the peril in stating so emphatically that faith alone is needed firstly is separates it from works and secondly it gives the impression that works are unimportant, optional, discretionary etc.

Welll… I don’t think we would want to go down that road. That leads to a discussion of whether or not those that call themselves Catholics do “any better” when it comes to walking the walk. Our focus is on our own state with God and our own faith, and our own actions. As Mother Angelica once said, “Look in the mirror… now say 'mind your own business.” That’s not directed at you, but at those that like to try to base a judgment against a person or group by stereotyping, or worse yet blame something on someone that they have no business blaming. We must also make sure that we are accurately representing the teachings that people hold.

As I’ve said, I believe “Catholics” and “Protestants” are a lot closer on the question of faith and works than most believe. Our wording and emphasis my indeed be different, and I feel there are pros and cons to how we each define and apply aspects of the teaching.

For example, a pastor had children with 2 different men out of wedlock, purposely and intentionally (she planned it that way). When I asked her if she thought it was odd that the bible which she uses as her guide shuns adultery and yet she chose this path…she looked at me like I had 2 heads. She was absolutely convinced that because she had faith she need not do anything. I wonder if she would feel obliged to “forgive those who trespass against us” or not feel required to do that either, I will let you know what she says next time I see her.

What denomination, if any, is she a pastor of? Do you think this person somehow represents Protestant thought? I’ve said it before, and will say it again, there are Protestant denominations and churches that are far more strict, controlling, legalistic, etc… than the RCC has ever been. We are a wide range of beliefs, as there is no “Protestant Church.” All I can tell you is that I’ve personally never met a Protestant say anything close to what you say that she is claiming. Though, I’m fairly certain there are people out there claiming to be from any number of religions, including Catholic, that are doing the same thing or worse.

 

[Dulcinea2721]

Not according to the way they saw it from a Jewish Covenant perspective. Again, as an example, no working on the Sabbath, but they were allowed to breathe, to think, to talk, to imagine, to trust, to love, etc… We have to go back to the Hebrew and the Greek to get a clear picture of what is actually being communicated.

So a cloistered nun who prays all day and does little else is not doing the work of God? Or a person who is incapable of physical labour can never accomplish God’s work? My ill, frail, old grandmother did not do work when she taught me?

Surely you do not believe that to be the teaching.

It’s like saying you want to fly to Hawaii, and that you trust the plane and the captain, yet you don’t get on the plane. From the outside, from me looking on, it would leave me believing you don’t really trust it, all things being equal. If Abraham said he trusted God, yet if he would never do anything God asked, that wouldn’t compute.

 

[Kliska]

So a cloistered nun who prays all day and does little else is not doing the work of God? Or a person who is incapable of physical labour can never accomplish God’s work? My ill, frail, old grandmother did not do work when she taught me?

Surely you do not believe that to be the teaching.

Doing the work of God, according to Jesus is having faith on the Son. If all of those people you gave an example of have faith in Jesus, and they are guided by His Spirit, then they are doing the work of God. Jesus makes it clear that He is our Sabbath rest, and we rest in Him, and He also makes it clear that He is a Shepherd that leads His Sheep and we follow and do as He asks. For some, He says “pray.” For some, He says, “Go to the mission field in China.” For some, He says, “focus on taking care of your family by working as a plumber.” etc…

You have completely missed my point. Some people I know think they have a **license **to do whatever they want because faith does not require works as they interpret that “faith alone” tenet.

But I didn’t miss your point. As I explained, I’ve never met a person (and I meant that literally, I don’t doubt there may be some out there) that has this attitude. Instead, those such as myself that believe in faith taping into grace, argues that yes, we are truly free but just because you can do what you want doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want. The meek shall inherit the earth; meekness is controlled strength. For a sheep in the field, there are no fences, but they are still expected to heed the Shepherds voice. Of course, the Shepherd will go get them if they wander off. If they don’t heed His voice, and He doesn’t go get them, then perhaps they are not His at all. Thank goodness I don’t have to judge that.

As for the MANY catholic people who do not walk the walk as you say, normally, they do not say that they are getting a free pass, normally they say that hey are going straight to hell for what they have done.(how they can really believe that they are going to hell and still do it is a whole different matter).

A Catholic friend of mine, in high school, quite clearly told me that he got to go do whatever he wanted on Friday and Saturday, go to confession on Sunday and be a-ok. Now, you and I would agree that he was not holding to the correct teaching. That is how we protestants would view anyone acting as you have described while claiming faith.

When I asked what a service at her church was like she said that they sing for about an hour hour, some solemn hymns to prepare the heart to receive the message, then she preaches on a passage of her own choosing, then more singing but joyful singing. Generally a 2 hour service. Don’t know if that is familiar to you.

Hmmm, no. I’ve actually never been anywhere in the Pentecostal denom that had a female pastor. The hymns and message style though would be standard fare.

Read some Luther things referring to murder and adultery and sinning big because faith alone is all you need. That made no sense.

I met some Baptists who preached once saved always saved. You are absolutely free of any consequence of sin in this life because everything had been paid in full. Just praise Jesus and rejoice in His love for us. That sounds appealing. No requirements or obligations. Could they be right? All I need to do is to stand in front of a congregation and profess Jesus as my personal Lord and Saviour?

The problem is how it is viewed and what is really taught, the same as in Catholicism. In short, y’all don’t take the confessional as a means to go sin freely, yet there are some both in and outside the RCC that take it that way. A mere profession or confession for any of us Christians isn’t enough; there has to be an internal change or shift, and that is where we all agree, I believe.

As I was saying the Lord’s prayer and reflecting on these encounters. I wondered if they believed in the Our Father. why would the Baptists need to ask for forgiveness if they have already been forgiven? If you do not have to DO anything, do you believe you have to forgive or is it optional? if it is optional why say it?

That is why I asked the question.

I have learned that many sects do not say it. Perhaps because they believe that forgiveness is already given, perhaps because they are not required to do anything according to them…those are different questions.

From all that I’ve seen and heard, the only reason the exact prayer would not be said would be to avoid rote prayer. However, every congregation I’ve been in that avoids saying it, their pastor or prayer leader will ask for forgiveness, etc… in their extemporaneous prayer. In short, it is duty vs. mutiny to confess our sin and ask for forgiveness even though we recognize (as do Catholics) that all sin was ultimately laid on Christ on the cross. We confess our sin and ask forgiveness and forgive others because the Spirit dwells in us and we respond to the teachings of Christ in faith.

One last point on this; it IS obvious that there have been people in history that abuse the teachings of Christ and Paul and all the rest. We see this clearly when Paul is so mad that someone is teaching that we should sin so that grace can abound. Obviously those people took the teaching and twisted it; that tells us two things; the real teaching can sound that way, and the real teaching was not that.

You and I agree that faith and works go hand in hand, even if we disagree that it should be stated “that way”.

I do agree, and can almost agree 100% with the way the Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin explains it as well.

 

[Dulcinea2721]

A Catholic friend of mine, in high school, quite clearly told me that he got to go do whatever he wanted on Friday and Saturday, go to confession on Sunday and be a-ok. Now, you and I would agree that he was not holding to the correct teaching. That is how we protestants would view anyone acting as you have described while claiming faith.

 

[Kliska]

What a high school kid interprets and what is the teaching of the RCC may be 2 different things, however I disagree that all protestants hold your views.

Well, now, I don’t think we can dismiss his view, as I hear and read about “Cafeteria Catholics” etc… that believe exactly the way he did, certainly all the friends he had around that were Catholic agreed. The point is; just because a member of a certain church or congregation misinterprets and abuses the teachings, it doesn’t mean it is representative of their church or congregation on any side.

You seem certain that the 33k different sects are in unison on this subject and I can assure you that I can name at least 2 who are leaders of congregations who would dissent and preach so.

Pleas reread what I wrote; I most certainly don’t contend that Protestants agree on anything much. Also, there are not “33,000” denominations or any such nonsense, just as there are not hundreds and thousands of separate Catholic Churches, but that’s digression from the topic.

However I have personally spoken with 2 people in authority ie pastors who think that you can “sin freely” and teach that. What you do on earth and your place in heaven are 2 separate things.

I’m sorry but I can’t quite believe that the people you were talking to were saying to go and sin. Perhaps they said that you could sin and were forgiven; as Paul says everything is permissible but not everything is profitable, we are not to be under the power of anything, esp. sin. Once more, we must be sure that we are truly seeking to understand the position being presented and not jump to a conclusion. As my example with my high school friend attests to.

You and I and the RCC along with SOME protestant sects agree certainly not ALL protestants.

Well, yes, and not all Catholics or Orthodox do either.

Grace and Peace to you, I’ve enjoyed this conversation, have a blessed day, it’s gorgeous in my neck of the woods finally.