What is the difference in Protestants being "saved" and Catholic salvation?

[JMM1957]

I thought Paul was very concerned about it. It was in the “race” discourse. Do not think he was talking about heaven but finishing his destiny, his earthly mission, to its fullest, in which he, like all of us, will be awarded accordingly. Like who will sit at His right hand , or even 3rd from the left etc etc ?

As I said, we do not know everything about heaven, but I don’t see any specific scriptural reference to some getting higher rewards in heaven than others. Just for starters, Rev. 3:21 says, “He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.” He doesn’t imply anything lesser. Sitting with Jesus on His throne is the highest and only level of reward for those who overcome, don’t you think? Where else do you see lower rewards?
If you are thinking of the mother of the two disciples who asked Jesus if her sons could sit on each side of Him in the kingdom of heaven, I don’t see that as proving different levels of reward either, just that Jesus was pointing to His Father as the one who grants eternal life to whomever He chooses.

 

[In_His_Grace]

Yes our “reward” is bought and paid for , propitiated , by Christ. In essence the Lord is “owed”, awarded, us, the spotless Bride.

Yes, absolutely, imputed righteousness as opposed to infused righteousness, declared righteous thanks to the finished work of atonement of Christ on the cross. Any Catholics want to tell us about the “snow covered dunghill”?

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Yes, absolutely, imputed righteousness as opposed to infused righteousness, declared righteous thanks to the finished work of atonement of Christ on the cross. Any Catholics want to tell us about the “snow covered dunghill”?

Blessings

Hi IHG,
Amen.

Actually I was surprised to see the Lutheran statement that actually used the word “reward” .I mean in understand what they meant and they clarified with the unmerited aspect, but it can still confuse people because it is usually used for something we have done.

At least it makes us talk about it, to make sure we are all on the same page as to our depravity and his astonishing grace.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

As I said, we do not know everything about heaven, but I don’t see any specific scriptural reference to some getting higher rewards in heaven than others. Just for starters, Rev. 3:21 says, “He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.” He doesn’t imply anything lesser. Sitting with Jesus on His throne is the highest and only level of reward for those who overcome, don’t you think? Where else do you see lower rewards?
If you are thinking of the mother of the two disciples who asked Jesus if her sons could sit on each side of Him in the kingdom of heaven, I don’t see that as proving different levels of reward either, just that Jesus was pointing to His Father as the one who grants eternal life to whomever He chooses.

I have heard it put figuratively with one is eating a big mac and the other tenderloin steak, yet both will blissfully content. I think it comes from the idea that we will reign with Him in the new kingdom. We will have "jobs’’, roles. Otherwise what is being suggested is that we follow or are with Christ when He rules, judges, does things that a king does in a kingdom, and we shadow Him equally. Don’t think so .

I think there are scriptures that says we will be active participants in the new kingdom. According to what we did on earth, and that He will give us “more”. More for me is different than say more for Pope Francis etc. This is our “reward” for a race well run to the very end.

Blessings

 

[Marty100]

If Catholics are Christians what are the steps they take to receive salvation?
Protestants believe Romans 10:9 & 10. Confess with your mouth and believe in your heart that Jesus is Lord and you shall be saved.

The Catholic Church really believes in Judgment for ones actions and adherence to the Catholic Dogma and Ordinances.

Evangelicals take the Scripture literally on the following versus:

Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works,

Other Protestants Vary

 

[Techno2000]

The Catholic Church really believes in Judgment for ones actions and adherence to the Catholic Dogma and Ordinances.

Evangelicals take the Scripture literally on the following versus:

Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works,

Other Protestants Vary

Jesus open Heaven as a free Gift to mankind, but the degree of the glory that you receive in eternity depends on your merits.

 

[JMM1957]

I have heard it put figuratively with one is eating a big mac and the other tenderloin steak, yet both will blissfully content.

Yes, and you won’t know that the other guy has the steak, you’ll just think everyone got a big mac.

 

[Michael68]

The Catholic Church really believes in Judgment for ones actions and adherence to the Catholic Dogma and Ordinances.

Evangelicals take the Scripture literally on the following versus:

Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works,

Other Protestants Vary

I believe that my faith causes the works, not the other way around.

 

[benhur]

I believe that my faith causes the works, not the other way around.

Is that a way of saying your faith and works save you?

 

[eazyduzit]

I believe that my faith causes the works, not the other way around.

Yes, but for the Catholic it is the works (caused by faith) that merit salvation. Is that what you mean?

 

[eazyduzit]

This is something that has always been debated among different Christian groups, and in my opinion is not something that we should concern ourselves with, after all, isn’t eternal life itself our goal? Why would anyone be looking for extra rewards in heaven? I do know that God shows no partiality. There is much about heaven that we don’t understand yet, so we will just have to wait for that day.

Jesus said." But lay up for yourselves TREASURES in heaven. …" I don’t know exactly what this will be, but I always assumed it means reward for service in the Gospel.
Is not the parable of the talents essentially about rewards?
Did not Jesus say that even to give a cup of water will not go unrewarded?

Is not all this something beyond basic salvation ?

 

[PRmerger]

Yes, but for the Catholic it is the works (caused by faith) that merit salvation. Is that what you mean?

This is not a correct articulation of Catholic theology.

Babies, who do NO WORKS whatsoever, yet merit salvation through baptism s proof that we belief salvation is a FREE GIFT, requiring no works.

 

[PRmerger]

This is not a correct articulation of Catholic theology.

Babies, who do NO WORKS whatsoever, yet merit salvation through baptism s proof that we belief salvation is a FREE GIFT, requiring no works.

From Catholic apologist John Martignoni:

The fact that we believe, as Catholics, that salvation is a free gift from God and that we do absolutely nothing to merit this salvation, is nowhere better evidenced than in our practice of infant baptism. We believe that, through baptism, we receive salvation. The fact that infants can receive this gift of salvation through baptism is proof that we believe salvation is by God’s grace alone. An infant cannot perform works and cannot make a profession of faith. But, through the faith of the parents, the child, upon being baptized, receives salvation…he is saved.

 

[powerofk]

From Catholic apologist John Martignoni:

The fact that we believe, as Catholics, that salvation is a free gift from God and that we do absolutely nothing to merit this salvation, is nowhere better evidenced than in our practice of infant baptism. We believe that, through baptism, we receive salvation. The fact that infants can receive this gift of salvation through baptism is proof that we believe salvation is by God’s grace alone. An infant cannot perform works and cannot make a profession of faith. But, through the faith of the parents, the child, upon being baptized, receives salvation…he is saved.

Right. We are saved by grace, and grace alone. And grace is bestowed by God’s love for us, yet to accept grace, we must love God and desire to love Him - and our fellow men & women created in His image - as God first loved us. There is nothing that we can do to deserve salvation - which is why it had to be given to us as a gift. Works done without grace are futile and accomplish nothing for our souls (good works done in a state of mortal sin are just as futile - though they can hopefully awaken the soul that there is a disconnect and bring the person into repentance).

Faith is the human response to and acceptance of grace. Faith, along with hope and love (Greek agape; Latin caritas), are the Divine Virtues given to us by the Holy Spirit. Now, it’s difficult to separate faith, hope, and love, as the three virtues are the impetus behind works. Works thus are to be a reflection of our faith. The works do not save in and of themselves, but, through the works, one’s own faith increases, as does the faith of the Church, the Bride of Christ. In addition, works done in faith and love attract more people to the Church, as they see how much faith the people in the Church have. And the ultimate work done out of faith, hope, and love is none other than dying for Jesus and His Church - which is why it is said that the Church is watered by the blood of the martyrs. Because they were willing to die for Jesus and His Church, others came to believe and were saved.

 

[eazyduzit]

This is not a correct articulation of Catholic theology.

Babies, who do NO WORKS whatsoever, yet merit salvation through baptism s proof that we belief salvation is a FREE GIFT, requiring no works.

Neither indeed can a baby have faith so i think it might be better not making them the example.

However, i was under the impression that Trent considers baptism a “work worked”.

 

[eazyduzit]

Not sure if you are conflating “truly saved” with “belong to the family of God”, but they are not the same thing.

You become a member of the family of God when you are baptized.

You become saved when you die and are with Him before the Eternal Throne of heaven.

So, right now, we know that you are a member of the family of God (if you were baptized in water using the Trinitarian formula),

but we don’t know if you are “truly saved” until you die. And even then we wouldn’t know it unless we were already saved.

Catholics have some of the most mature walks with God and yet no Catholic who’s alive, walking on this earth, ought to claim that he is saved.

I am confused by your claims PR. First i am told that Catholics are not saved in baptism and now thy are? Does it depend on who we ask?

 

[Michael68]

I am confused by your claims PR. First i am told that Catholics are not saved in baptism and now thy are? Does it depend on who we ask?

I don’t get it! Are you here to just cause confusion?

 

[In_His_Grace]

Neither indeed can a baby have faith so i think it might be better not making them the example.

However, i was under the impression that Trent considers baptism a “work worked”.

Neither indeed can a baby have faith …

Speaking of John the Baptist, is it possible to be filled with the Holy Spirit apart from faith? …

“… and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb. …the baby leaped in her womb…the baby leaped in my womb for joy.” (Luke 1:15,41,44)

 

[JMM1957]

Neither indeed can a baby have faith so i think it might be better not making them the example.

However, i was under the impression that Trent considers baptism a “work worked”.

Acts 2: 38Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39"For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself.”

Luke 18: 15And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them. 16But Jesus called for them, saying, “Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.”

 

[benhur]

Speaking of John the Baptist, is it possible to be filled with the Holy Spirit apart from faith? …

“… and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb. …the baby leaped in her womb…the baby leaped in my womb for joy.” (Luke 1:15,41,44)

Very good rebuttal. But it cuts both ways.It shows the Spirit can not be confined to a “ceremony” or rite/sacrament. It can give credence to symbolic view of baptism etc., that they show the already spiritual reality.

Suffice it to say indeed let us be baptized in the Holy Ghost , let us be “born again” but to take care about blanket statements on just how that happens in a sacrament/rite, if it does at all.

If anyone questions infant regeneration thru water baptism it is probably because they question water baptism as the cause in regeneration in anyone.

But good point on John the Baptist.

Blessings