THe proverbial Protestant "Silver Bullet"

[Ozzie]

pnewton:

Let us be clear that we are talking about people. Sheep and goats are just analogies that need not be pressed too far. Goats can become sheep (lost can be saved) we all agree on. Sheep can become goats. Catholics and a lot of Protestants agree on.

That Biblical scene is at the end of the age, at the 2nd Advent of Jesus Christ. It is a judgment scene. At that moment one is judged either a “sheep” (believer) or a* “goat”* (unbeliever). Your argument is not germane.

 

[Ozzie]

pnewton:

The context was the the miracle of the loaves an fishes and what ensued. If it was just about believing, then why did so many followers find this a hard teaching? There was an exodus of disciples who left unhindered by Jesus. What kind of teacher would allow such a misunderstanding to undermine the faith of His followers?

He didn’t “undermine” anyone’s faith, He exposed their lack of it in Him. Those disciples never did believe in WHO He was. They followed Him for the wrong reasons, and Jesus knew it. Compare the faith of those so-called “disciples” to those whom Jesus Himself chose.

 

[Ozzie]

Pnewton:

I agree on the definition of metanoia, meaning to change one’s mind, I just think it involves more than just a change of belief. Rather I see a change of attitude toward sin.

It doesn’t involve a “change of belief,” but a change from unbelief to *belief *(Jn. 3:14-18; cf. 1Cor. 15:1-3; Heb. 1:3).

Penance is an entirely different issue and has no bearing on this passage

The RC sacrament of “Penance/Reconciliation” is entirely germane to this subject. Scripture teaches us that all true believes receive from God, upon true belief in the Person of Jesus Christ and His work on the cross on their behalf, a complete pardon of ALL sins.

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

Jesus unequivocally explained to the Apostle Paul his mission to the Gentiles:
ACT 26:15-18 “And I said, ‘Who art Thou, Lord?’ And the Lord said, 'I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. ‘But arise, and stand on your feet; for this purpose I have appeared to you, to appoint you a minister and a witness not only to the things which you have seen, but also to the things in which I will appear to you; delivering you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am sending you, to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness (this is the act of repentance) to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, in order that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.’”

Notice in the above passages that the Gentiles were to turn from their unbelief to belief in Christ through Paul’s gospel. Thereby turning from spiritual darkness to spiritual light. This is “repentance.” And in so doing they receive complete forgiveness of sins (all sins, plural) and an “inheritance” (eternal life), along with the Jewish believers who had already been “sanctified by faith” in Christ Jesus. Hence, through personal faith in the Person and work of Jesus Christ one repents (turns to God through faith in Christ), receives forgiveness of ALL sins (based on the cross), and is completely sanctified (set aside) in Christ Jesus.

but did you know that for the Sacrament of Reconcilliation to be valid one must also repent, in regard to the confessed sin? Resolution to avoid sin is critical.

Yes, I am very familiar with the RCC sacrament. That’s why I take issue with it. Did you know that this side of the cross the Biblical message of salvation is not repentance* “of sins”* for the divine forgiveness of sins, but personal faith in the One who was sacrificed FOR your sins? The sacrament of “Reconciliation/Penance” is the message of Rome, but not the message Christ Himself delivered to the Apostle Paul. To the Colossian believers Paul writes that he prays day and night that they “may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so that they may walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please Him in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God…giving thanks to the Father, who qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints in light. For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, IN WHOM we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins" (Col. 1:10-14). In chapter two Paul goes on to tell the Colossian believers that God has made us alive together with Christ (resurrected), having forgiven us ALL our transgressions, having "canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of degrees against us, and which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Col. 2:13-14).

Continued to next post…

 

[Ozzie]

Continued from previous post:

God had His “judgment day” on sin 2000 years ago when the Son, as a substitutionary sin-sacrifice, took upon Himself ALL our sins and endured our penalty on the cross, in our stead (read 2 Cor. 5:21). But contrary to this truth Rome says YOU must still deal with your sins. The Bible says God dealt with your sins 2000 years ago through Christ. Rome says the “church” must reconcile you to God. The Bible says God reconciled you (past tense) to Himself through Christ (2 Cor. 5:14-21).

2COR. 5:18 “Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ, and gave us the ministry of reconciliation,”

COL. 1:22 "yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach–"

The message of RC’ism is that sin is STILL the barrier between man and God, hence its sacramental system. The Bible emphatically states that God forever dealt with all of man’s sins through the “once-for-all,” substitutionary, blood sacrifice of His beloved Son; and one’s refusal to believe this gospel (good news) message concerning His Son is the only barrier between sinful man and God. RC’s sacrament of Penance/Reconciliation is rooted in *unbelief *and contrary to the basic Gospel message regarding our forgiveness of sins and our reconciliation to God through faith in Christ Jesus.

 

[pnewton]

Ozzie:

The Roman Catholic interpretation of those verses regarding Peter and the Roman Episcopate was a later development. And it is that self-serving development that you opted to read into Scripture. To say you’re “not bound to the Bible” is to say you’re not bound to God’s Word. Such rebellion is what put humanity into the mess it’s in today, and required God the Son to become a Man and a substitutionary sin-sacrifice for man’s redemption. It’s God’s revelatory Word that separates true Christianity from all man-made religions on this earth.

I do not believe the interpretation because it is hte Roman Catholic intermpretation. I believe it because of my own reading of it. I was not a Catholic, but I did try to put aside my Baptist biased , something others should try. Then you can read out of and not into a scripture. Why should the way a Baptist interprets this passage be of greater value than a Catholic, or why is your exegisis better than mine?

There is no rebellion to the word of God, the Bible is not the sole word of God, right? (see John 1:1). Have you ever been led by the Holy Spirit at all? Thus to be bound by the words of Scripture only is the true rejection of the “word of God”. Perhaps a more accurately phrasing is that we are not bound to the Bible alone. (although it seems a little redundant to me)

 

[pnewton]

Ozzie:

He didn’t “undermine” anyone’s faith, He exposed their lack of it in Him. Those disciples never did believe in WHO He was. They followed Him for the wrong reasons, and Jesus knew it. Compare the faith of those so-called “disciples” to those whom Jesus Himself chose.

Like Judas?

Your right. He didn’t and wouldn’t undermine anyone’s faith, especially by misleading them. That is why I believe in His Real Presennce in the Eucharist.

 

[pnewton]

Ozzie:

It doesn’t involve a “change of belief,” but a change from unbelief to *belief *

You are the one who started to imply some meaning to the the word “repents.” Now you give it more meaning than it has. The specific use you are giving is more narrow than the word itself. Perhaps the problem is a semantical quabble. I do not buy the idea of unbelief as if it was a vacuum of ideas. The unbeliver still has a mindset or belief system based on something. Most non-Christians even have a moral system.

All the verses you quoted neither promote or exclude any methodolgy. You of course do not believe in the Sacrament of Reconcilliation, even though the basis for it can be found in scripture. Yet you would promote the sinners prayer, which is no where found in scripture, based on the same arguement, that the basis of it can be found in scripture.

 

[pnewton]

Ozzie,

One claim I can make that is irrefutable. I approached the Scripture as a Baptist, trained in exegisis, for the purpose of underming Catholic theology. I was not totallly open-minded, but even with my bias I saw where Christ established a Church with Peter. I saw the way works of charity was woven into the theology of salvation and was still by grace alone. I also saw the clear teaching of Jesus Christ fully present in what is called the Lord’s Supper.

At the very least the Catholic postition is a credible, Biblical and historical position. And there is no other claim the Fundamentalist can make other than add their, “and I think so to!” to their theology.

 

[mtr01]

Ozzie:

Yes, it is faith alone - because the content of salvation faith is the Person and* finished* work of Jesus Christ on the cross. Love (or charity) is describing the actions and attitude of one who is saved, i.e., “I am nothing,” but has nothing to do with one getting saved. Salvation is rooted in the Person and work of Jesus Christ on our behalf, and His work is applied, in full, to the one who turns to Him by faith alone (see Jn. 3:14-18). Your works cannot save you, even works of love, only HIS can (read again Eph. 2:8-10).

No, it is not faith alone. Unfortunately, you misunderstand the nature of the word “believe” as used by John, not to mention the distinction between works of the law and Christian works of love (charity). First of all, what is the nature of “believe”? If you look at the entire Johanine opus we see that his take on faith and works is that true faith is work, and true work is faith. This is seen in light of Jn 1:12-13. The word “pisteuo” in both passages is a synecdoche (a part that represents the whole). In other words, it refer to an obedient faith that represents all that is necessary to follow Christ and be saved (taking up our cross everyday, repentence, baptism, etc.). In other words, a faith formed in love (fides formata charitate); the same type of faith Paul talks about (Rom 1:5; 16:26) . Mere intellectual assent of faith (fides informis) is not enough, and cannot save anyone (James 2:14).

 

[Church_Militant]

Continued from previous post:

God had His “judgment day” on sin 2000 years ago when the Son, as a substitutionary sin-sacrifice, took upon Himself ALL our sins and endured our penalty on the cross, in our stead (read 2 Cor. 5:21). But contrary to this truth Rome says YOU must still deal with your sins. The Bible says God dealt with your sins 2000 years ago through Christ. Rome says the “church” must reconcile you to God. The Bible says God reconciled you (past tense) to Himself through Christ (2 Cor. 5:14-21).

The message of RC’ism is that sin is STILL the barrier between man and God, hence its sacramental system. The Bible emphatically states that God forever dealt with all of man’s sins through the “once-for-all,” substitutionary, blood sacrifice of His beloved Son; and one’s refusal to believe this gospel (good news) message concerning His Son is the only barrier between sinful man and God. RC’s sacrament of Penance/Reconciliation is rooted in *unbelief *and contrary to the basic Gospel message regarding our forgiveness of sins and our reconciliation to God through faith in Christ Jesus.

If that was true then WHY Matthew 25:31-46, which VERY CLEARLY says that we will be judged by what we have or have not “done to these the least of the brethren”? This passage obviously points to a FUTURE judgement based upon obedience to the comandments that Christ gave us.

This is totally untrue…you misconstrue the teachings of the church. AT LEAST have the common sense and courtesy to KNOW what is really being taught before you allege a falsehood.

So then tell me what this passage from the Word of God means then? (John 20:21-23) "21 He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. 22 When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained."

If your interpretation is true then I can live any way I choose because my sins are all paid for and my lack of faithfulness and obedience to Christ is irrelevent to my salvation. That’s just plain ludicrous…yet that is your OSAS position. Let’s just have another look at what that Bible there by your comp really says about all this okay?

John 14:15 If you love me, keep my commandments.

John 15:10 If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have kept my Father’s commandments, and do abide in his love.

Matthew 19:17 Who said to him: Why asketh thou me concerning good? One is good, God. But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

1 John 2:3 And by this we know that we have known him, if we keep his commandments.

1 John 3:22 And whatsoever we shall ask, we shall receive of him: because we keep his commandments, and do those things which are pleasing in his sight.

1 John 5:2 In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and keep his commandments.

1 John 5:3 For this is the charity of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not heavy.

Apocalypse 12 :17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Apocalypse 14 :12 Here is the patience of the saints, who keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

John 8 :51 Amen, amen I say to you: If any man keep my word, he shall not see death for ever.

John 14 :23 Jesus answered, and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him.

So…I would have to say that all your position is pretty clearly contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself since the clear weight of His own words proves you to be in error. How can you live with that when the truth is handed to you like this? How long will you continue in your deception and misdirections when your very soul and the souls of those that you “preach” to hang in the balance? I couldn’t do that with a clear conscience…NO WAY.

 

[Ignatius]

Ozzie:

Yes, it is faith alone - /QUOTE]

Ozzie,

The quotes you gave do not support your “Faith Alone” contention. Furthermore, your statement is a direct contradiction of Holy Scripture: Jame 2:24

24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith alone

.

Since it directlly contradicts Scripture, it is false.

May God bless and keep you.

 

[Ozzie]

pnewton:

I do not believe the interpretation because it is hte Roman Catholic intermpretation. I believe it because of my own reading of it.

No you don’t, that’s impossible. The text regarding Peter, and elsewhere the other Apostles, states nothing regarding the Roman Episcopate or the “Pope.” Nor do you find ANYWHERE in the N.T. Scriptures the idea that Peter, Paul or any of the Apostles appointed “successors” in Rome or any other church. You must read all of this into the text. Talk about “eisegesis!” In fact, the Bible emphatically states that the Church/Body of Christ is being built UPON the foundation of the Apostles and N.T. prophets (Eph. 2:20-22). A “foundation” is laid only once and is then built upon. The idea of “Apostolic successors” militates against this very basic, fundamental Bible truth regarding Christ, the Apostles, and His Church.

There is no rebellion to the word of God, the Bible is not the sole word of God, right? (see John 1:1).

The Scriptures are theopneustos, “God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16) and therefore wield the authority of God Himself. They are in written form and have not changed since the day they were penned, hence reliable. You cannot say that of men, nor does the Bible say that of any man, except Christ Jesus - but, alas, He is not with us at this time. But the written Word of God is, hence, everything pertaining to faith and practice must be tested by it.

You may say you’re not bound by the Scriptues now, but in one way or another, you’ll be judge by them in the future!!

 

[Ignatius]

Ozzie:

The Roman Catholic interpretation of those verses regarding Peter.

That’s an interesting statement. How much later? When is the earliest occurance of this “later” interpretation?

 

[Ignatius]

Ozzie:

Ignatius:
What have the “goats” in that passage done?
What have the “sheep” done?

Hint: “For I was”. . . .

Nevertheless, they enter the Kingdom (earthly, Millennial) BECAUSE they’re sheep: JOH 10:27 *“My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.” *

Yes, they enter the Kingdom because they are sheep. But you miss the whole point; Jesus is saying “For I was hungry and you fed me”, “I was a stranger an you took me in”, etc. That is what MADE THEM SHEEP!

May the peace of Christ be with you.

 

[pnewton]

Ozzie:

No you don’t, that’s impossible.

You may say you’re not bound by the Scriptues now, but by one way or another, you’ll be judge by them in the future!!

Why do you state what happened was an impossibility. This is one of the most arrogant statements I have every seen. It is not an impossibility because it happened.

It never ceases to amaze me how blind people like you who preach"Bible only" are. You are blind to the fact that the Bible itself does not promote “Bible only” but is only a tradition of yours. You are blind to the fact that what you really mean is "Bible only in the way I have interpreted it."

You are so blind that you say what really happened to me was impossible.

Take the log out of your own eye before you come here to remove a speck.

Again, I said I am not bound by the scripture** alone**. I will be judged by the Word of God, but it will be the living Word of God who was from the begining, the Alpha and Omega.

 

[Ozzie]

Ignatius:

Yes, they enter the Kingdom because they are sheep. But you miss the whole point; Jesus is saying “For I was hungry and you fed me”, “I was a stranger an you took me in”, etc. That is what MADE THEM SHEEP!

May the peace of Christ be with you.

No, my friend, that’s what identified them, but it’s not what MADE them sheep. He had already identified them AS His sheep when He separated them from the goats. They’re works were the natural result of who they were. Christ Himself had to point out their works to them. There is no idea of conscious, meritorious works involved in these verses.

 

[Exporter]

Hey Ozzie, I have been reading some of your posts, and it’s true that you have some odd sayings.
OZZIE

To satisfy my curiosity, will you answer some questions?

1. Do you agree that when a person is Baptised, all of his past sins are forgiven?
2. Do you agree that after the Baptism that person can commit sins?
3. Do you agree that the sins commited after Baptism can be forgiven? (1st John 1:9)
4. Do you agree that if the person who committed sins after Baptism could refuse to ask God for Forgiveness?
5. If that sinner did not ask for forgiveness then his soul still contained these sins, is that correct?
6. If that person was run over and killed in the state exhibited in #5, would he die in a state of sin?
   7.* Do you contend that it doesn’t matter to God that the person died out of a state of Grace?

 

[TNT]

Ozzie:

No, my friend, that’s what identified them, but it’s not what MADE them sheep. He had already identified them AS His sheep when He separated them from the goats. They’re** works were the natural result of who they were.** Christ Himself had to point out their works to them. There is no idea of conscious, meritorious works involved in these verses.

I’ll try to give my analogy of OZZIE’s Idea:
You get pregnant (SAVED) the baby shows up as a NATURAL result, whether YOU want it to or not. Once you are saved, Free will is shed like a cacoon, and VOILA, you can’t help but do good works…that baby is gonna show up, hell or high water.

Now, I described OZZIES program of “getting saved” back on Post 29:
Repeating:
According to OZZIE, as I understand it:

1. Earn, beg, borrow, or steal a bible (only available after 380AD) Too bad for schlucks before that and anyone who could not read after that.
   2. Learn to read. (Blind need not apply.)
   2a. Go out and buy or make a pair of reading glasses if needed.
   3. Find the ONE verse = ROM 10:13
   4. Think up a “sinners prayer” and recite it with meaning…ONCE.
   5. Have faith that this prayer will give you heaven
   #1 = a work.
   #2 = a work or dbl work.
   #3 = a work
   #4 = a work
   #5 = Faith
   So far the final score is: WORK 4+ Faith alone 1.
   Now,having done all this non-work work:
   1. Tear out the ROM 10:13 verse.
   2. Throw the rest of the bible away. It cannot save you. Bible study on Sun. and Wed nite is completely superfluous.
   3. Fall into temptation and sin.
   4. Go straight to heaven.
      One caution:
      Do NOT pick the wrong trick verse in your “bible” !
      Out of the many thousands of verses if one should pick some trick verse like:
      “BAPTISM now saves you”
      “He who believes AND is baptized, shall be saved”
      “Each will be JUDGED according to his works”
      “Faith without works is DEAD”
      “Unless a man is boirn AGAIN of WATER and the Holy Spirit he CANNOT enter the Kingdom of Heaven”
      “If you love me keep my commandments”
      “WORK out your salvation in fear and trembling.”
      “1Cor 9:
      26 I therefore so run, not as at an uncertainty: I so fight, not as one beating the air: 27 But I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway.”
      “sell all you have and give the proceeds to the poor, if you be perfect”
      “unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood, you have NO life in you” (a bunch of work here.)
      Or countless other trap door verses, and makes the innocent mistake of believing these as being literal and essential, you’re dead meat.
      The game is over and you lose.
      What this amounts to is a “trick you with the wrong verse to believe” type of game-show religion.
      The final score in this process is:
      Satan 1. Bible non-Worker Worker 0.

 

[Church_Militant]

Thanks TNT…I couldn’t’ve analyzed that any better. I never really saw it as a “trick verse” game…
Pax vobiscum,

 

[Exporter]

Hey Ozzie, I have been reading some of your posts, and it’s true that you have some odd sayings.
OZZIE

To satisfy my curiosity, will you answer some questions?

1. Do you agree that when a person is Baptised, all of his past sins are forgiven?
2. Do you agree that after the Baptism that person can commit sins?
3. Do you agree that the sins commited after Baptism can be forgiven? (1st John 1:9)
4. Do you agree that if the person who committed sins after Baptism could refuse to ask God for Forgiveness?
5. If that sinner did not ask for forgiveness then his soul still contained these sins, is that correct?
6. If that person was run over and killed in the state exhibited in #5, would he die in a state of sin?
   7.* Do you contend that it doesn’t matter to God that the person died out of a state of Grace?

---

Ozzie, would you just try?