What must I do to be saved?

[PRmerger]

QED as in:
Originally Latin meaning “quod erat demonstrandum” or “which was to be shown or proven”, now used mainly to insult someone when something is proven wrong or false

Could you please cite your source for the above definition, pesce?

My understanding is that it is not an insult, but a Latin phrase used in philosophy and law.

Now, I did a search of my own for your definition and found this:

google.com/search?q=Originally+Latin+meaning+%22quod+erat+demonstrandum%22+or+%22which+was+to+be+shown+or+proven%22%2C+now+used+mainly+to+insult+someone+when+something+is+proven+wrong+or+false&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

It seems that the insult is mainly “used by physics students”…so it is curious why you would delete that portion of the definition.

 

[fpesce]

Holy cow!!! Fpesce! do you understand what is ment by the church being infallible? I understand you are a Catholic? Someone else on this sight can explain it better than I. Please read you Catechism.

Hey, David Castlen,

Don’t have a cow… okay. Can’t you see I was just poking PRmergers comments, in jest…

Okay, breaathe, yep,now you got it.

 

[fpesce]

Could you please cite your source for the above definition, pesce?

My understanding is that it is not an insult, but a Latin phrase used in philosophy and law.

Now, I did a search of my own for your definition and found this:

google.com/search?q=Originally+Latin+meaning+%22quod+erat+demonstrandum%22+or+%22which+was+to+be+shown+or+proven%22%2C+now+used+mainly+to+insult+someone+when+something+is+proven+wrong+or+false&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

It seems that the insult is mainly “used by physics students”…so it is curious why you would delete that portion of the definition.

Okay… no more jesting from me, it makes people nervous, not you though. Ha
Back to the subject at hand.

 

[fpesce]

Okay… no more jesting from me, it makes people nervous, not you though. Ha
Back to the subject at hand.

Can’t we agree that we are saved by faith. And the fruits of true faith is good works?

For instance, if someone has just gotten the revelation that Jesus Christ is our Savior, he repents from his sins and gives his life to Jesus. At this point do we agree he is saved?

Okay, if No then we cannot come to an agreement.

If Yes, then we can go on with this discussion.

 

[PJM]

=Gracealone;8186773]Thanx 4 correcting me PRmerger re: Catholics believe we are saved by works. I am actually lumping into that term anything that is on top of/additional to faith in Jesus as saved by works, meaning JC was not enough to save - saved by works…

Question: I presume that you can tell me how the thief on the cross was baptized… Or took communion/Lord’s Supper, or did some good works?
Or for that fact any of characters in Jesus parables, the gospels, letters etc.

***My dear brother in Christ,

Thank you for your ministry!

At the base of salvation is Jesus Christ; God. And He shares with us that which exceeds human understanding. The possibility of Salvation.

Salvation; BECAUSE CHRIST HIMSELF tells us so through His Divinely Inspired WORD,
[2nd. Tim. 3:16-17] and His Church, [Mt. 16:19, Jn. 20:19-22, Jn:14:16-17 and Jn.17:15-19] …ALL EXCLUSIVE to His One God, One Faith and One Church, Catholic Church, that it is fool-hardy to assume in error that anyone can, or anyone will attain their own salvation without having shared in His suffering. Salvation is a PROCESS, BECAUSE that is God’s stated Will. NO ONE "ANYTHING ALONE WILL CAUSE OR INSURE OUR SALVATION. Because this is GOD’s own Will and directive.

1Pet.4: 13 ” But rejoice in so far as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.

1Pet.5: 1, 9* “So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ as well as a partaker in the glory that is to be revealed. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experience of suffering is required of your brotherhood throughout the world.”

**Phil.1: 29 **“For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake, “

**2Thes.1: 5 **“This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be made worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering “

Heb. 2: 10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering.

“Reedemption” is NOT the same as “Salvation.” Redemption results from What Jesus undertook for OUR sake. ALL ARE Redeemed by the Blood of Christ! HOWEVER this means ONLY that we are “Redeemed” Not saved. Heaven once again become a REAL possibility for those who “have ears and use them, eyes and see Him”.

Jesus Instituted the Seven Sacraments. "Seven: being the number for “perfect” and “complete” Each sacrament plays a role is salvation as they relate to our “Call”. Marriage, and priesthood, are paticular to those calls. Each of the other sacraments has a role to play is assisting and directing us to Christ for Eternity.

The “Good theif” merited Salvation because. 1.He had PERFRECT contrition and had he been given the opportunity would have changed the way he had been living. 2. He professed Christ as God. Because the church recogonizes THREE forms of Baptism as being vaild. Water through the HS, Desire, and Blood. [Mt. 16:19, Jn.20;20-21] gives the Church this RIGHT. This sinner converted and “stoled heaven” ny Both desire and Blood as a witness to Christ.

“Good works start and end in Charity.” Did not the “good theif” proclaim to the other theif: “we desrve this; He is innocent.” AND is that not charity? And how do we know that he did not perform other acts of charity? As for Communion: he was "in-communion [unity] with Christ. The Most Holy Eucharist is NOT essential for salvation BUT is the MOST active and Powerful way of leading One to Christ and staying and suffering WITH Christ.

**Phil.2: 8 **“And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross **Luke.9 :23 **And he said to all, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. Mark.8: 34 And he called to him the multitude with his disciples, and said to them, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. Luke.9: 23 And he said to all, "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. Luke.14: 7 Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.” **

Space limits a more detailed responce; feel free to PM me if you’d like futher information?

I’m qualified and willing to discuss in detail anything of interest to you.

God BLESS YOU!
Pat

 

[fpesce]

You laid out the truth of the gospel quite throuroughly I’d like to add a few notes. Who did Jesus repremand? Was it the sinners? Nope. It was the religious leaders. So yes, God doesn’t go for religion.

Leadee, Jesus repremanded CORRUPT leaders of the church. Not against religious leaders (because of their title). It is a matter of what was in their hearts and used their position for their own gain.

I agree with GraceAlone, that is what the bible says.

In the Old Testament, Jews were required to sacifice a perfect lamb to be cleansed of your sin.

It was a forerunner until Jesus came.

Jesus was the perfect lamb that was slain to pay for our sins. It is by His righteousness that we are reconciled to God.

When Jesus died the curtain in the tabernacle was torn from top to bottom, because we didn’t need an intermediary any longer. With Jesus we have become righteous.

Now there is no need to slay the perfect lamb for our sins. The perfect lamb is Jesus Christ.

We can’t boast of our own holiness by our works. But though the works of Jesus Christ only.

I keep trying to show you that works is fruit of faith. We are judged by our fruit, only to testify of our faith and love. Not to our salvation.

Why is that so hard to understand? It clearly states that in the bible many many times. Go back and look at my past posts. Most of them are Jesus’s quotes. How can you argue with Jesus’s own words?

 

[PRmerger]

Hey, David Castlen,

Don’t have a cow… okay. Can’t you see I was just poking PRmergers comments, in jest…

Okay, breaathe, yep,now you got it.

What you mean is that by “jesting” you were exaggerating your ignorance about what Church infallibility means?

 

[PRmerger]

At this point do we agree he is saved?

No one is saved until he dies, pesce.

 

[pablope]

Can’t we agree that we are saved by faith. And the fruits of true faith is good works?

For instance, if someone has just gotten the revelation that Jesus Christ is our Savior, he repents from his sins and gives his life to Jesus. At this point do we agree he is saved?

Okay, if No then we cannot come to an agreement.

If Yes, then we can go on with this discussion.

Hi, Fpesce…at this point, it may help the discussion to give your definition or understanding of what is to be “saved”?

Saved to a catholic means been judged (at death) and on the way to heaven.

Saved to some protestants does not mean the same thing, it means being “baptized” so to speak, to be a christian, or the point of receiving and believing God’s word.

Peace and blessings…

 

[Tomster]

What’s this “actual” grace? There is only one word for grace in the bible, charis. Your theology contradicts itself. Either grace is sufficient or it’s not. You can’t have it both ways. You are saying you need to add your own work to grace. That is an insult to the giver. That is definately a man made idea.

Of course there should be good works. There’s no debate about that. The huge difference is the motivation of those works. You can do them out of the flesh, which is out of fear and striving for God’s approval, or you can do them out of the spirit, which is out of love for God for what He’s already done for you. Works of the flesh are not counted for anything in the spirit. God is spirit. You are working in vain if you choose the first. I’m not making this up, the bible says it. We all know about the passage where Jesus says to those who did good things “I do now know you.” A person can do all sorts of good deeds and profit nothing for God’s Kingdom. The deeds must be done in His Spirit to give Him glory, period.

Actual grace is any supernatural and transient aid by which God enlightens the mind or assists the will to produce supernatural acts. It affects the faculties of the soul (intellect and will), whereas habitual grace affects the very substance. Such grace may be given either immediately (“No man cometh to me, except the Father . . . draw him,” John 6:44), or mediately, on the occasion of a reading of Scripture or the hearing of a sermon, from a joy or sorrow, etc.

 

[Leadee]

Leadee, since our redemption and sanctification weren’t finished until the Resurrection, as St. Paul tells us in Romans 4:24-25, we know that Jesus wasn’t referring to his work of salvation when He said “It is finished.” He was referring to the Passover – which began at the Last Supper and was finished by the consumption of the Fourth Cup on the Cross, as explained in the link I provided.

That sure sounds like a complicated stretch of interpretation to me.

My post had no reference to the Catholic Church’s teaching that Christ died ONCE FOR ALL (one time only) for the sins of all mankind. Your interpretation is that all our sins – past, present, and future – are covered by the once-for-all sacrifice.

Yes, that’s my understanding. I also believe it has to be appropriated in order to cover ones sins.

Jesus died for the sins of everyone in the whole world, but each individual has to apply that redemption to himself or it’s of no effect to him. And at Baptism, his past sins are washed away and he is a new creation, full of grace and the Holy Spirit like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. But he is personally accountable for any sins he commits following Baptism. That’s why Jesus gave the ministry of reconciliation to his Apostles (John 20:19-23) – they had the authority to hear the confessions of the Faithful and grant them absolution for sins committed after Baptism. Christ’s same authority was passed down to others whom the Apostles ordained to succeed them (Timothy and Titus, for example).

Let me get this straight, a person’s sins are washed away when they are baptised, so Christ’s death and resurrection is good for your sins up to this point, but if you sin after this you have to pay for these sins or find someone who has the Holy Spirit to forgive you. What about the fact that when you are born again you have Christ in you (Col 1:27, Gal 2:20)? His Spirit living in you isn’t enough then?

Every believer actually has the Holy Spirit indwelling, not just a select few that have been given special favor by God (1 Cor 6:19) so why do they have to go to someone else who is appointed by God to ask to be forgiven?

 

[Tomster]

You laid out the truth of the gospel quite throuroughly I’d like to add a few notes. Who did Jesus repremand? Was it the sinners? Nope. It was the religious leaders. So yes, God doesn’t go for religion.

ACTUALLY, religion is a virtue by which men exhibit due worship and reverence to God as the Creator and Supreme Ruler of all things, and to ackowledge him a due and fitting worship both interior (e.g., by acts of devotion, reverence, thanksgiving, etc.) and exterior (e.g., by external reverence, liturgical acts, etc.). This virtue can be sinned against by idolatry, superstition, false worship, sacrilege, blasphemy, etc.

Religion requires that the whole man worship with all his faculties and acts; praise, thanksgiving and petition are only parts of the duties of religious worship; the intellect must believe that which is true concerning God (faith) and the will be directed to those actions which are right and the avoidance of those which are wrong (morals).

The first business of religion is to answer the questions: Who and what is God? Why and how are we here? Where do we go? - and then to direct and help man to the attainment of the end put before him.

 

[fpesce]

What you mean is that by “jesting” you were exaggerating your ignorance about what Church infallibility means?

Sorry, I am going to keep my word, no more jesting.

 

[Tomster]

Jim Dandy;8184008:

Leadee, since our redemption and sanctification weren’t finished until the Resurrection, as St. Paul tells us in Romans 4:24-25, we know that Jesus wasn’t referring to his work of salvation when He said “It is finished.” He was referring to the Passover – which began at the Last Supper and was finished by the consumption of the Fourth Cup on the Cross, as explained in the link I provided.

That sure sounds like a complicated stretch of interpretation to me.

My post had no reference to the Catholic Church’s teaching that Christ died ONCE FOR ALL (one time only) for the sins of all mankind. Your interpretation is that all our sins – past, present, and future – are covered by the once-for-all sacrifice.

Yes, that’s my understanding. I also believe it has to be appropriated in order to cover ones sins.

Jesus died for the sins of everyone in the whole world, but each individual has to apply that redemption to himself or it’s of no effect to him.

And at Baptism, his past sins are washed away and he is a new creation, full of grace and the Holy Spirit like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. But he is personally accountable for any sins he commits following Baptism. That’s why Jesus gave the ministry of reconciliation to his Apostles (John 20:19-23) – they had the authority to hear the confessions of the Faithful and grant them absolution for sins committed after Baptism. Christ’s same authority was passed down to others whom the Apostles ordained to succeed them (Timothy and Titus, for example).

Let me get this straight, a person’s sins are washed away when they are baptised, so Christ’s death and resurrection is good for your sins up to this point, but if you sin after this you have to pay for these sins or find someone who has the Holy Spirit to forgive you. What about the fact that when you are born again you have Christ in you (Col 1:27, Gal 2:20)? His Spirit living in you isn’t enough then?

Every believer actually has the Holy Spirit indwelling, not just a select few that have been given special favor by God (1 Cor 6:19) so why do they have to go to someone else who is appointed by God to ask to be forgiven?

Leadee,

So, then, why did Jesus tell His Apostles, “Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven them. And whose sins you retain, they are retained.”? - John 20: 21-23

 

[fpesce]

No one is saved until he dies, pesce.

What bible did you get that from?

 

[Leadee]

Grace is always sufficent; it is, however, not always efficacious, Leadee.

What you are saying makes no sense. How can something be sufficient ( Enough; adequate.) but not be efficacious ($10 word for effective)?

 

[ESMDHokie77]

What bible did you get that from?

Why does something need to be from a bible? Sola Scriptura is self-refuting.

 

[PRmerger]

Sorry, I am going to keep my word, no more jesting.

But really, rather than not “jesting”, please try to simply learn and profess that which is part of the deposit of faith, given once for all, to the saints.

 

[fpesce]

Hi, Fpesce…at this point, it may help the discussion to give your definition or understanding of what is to be “saved”?

Saved to a catholic means been judged (at death) and on the way to heaven.

Saved to some protestants does not mean the same thing, it means being “baptized” so to speak, to be a christian, or the point of receiving and believing God’s word.

Peace and blessings…

In other words your answer is “No”. For which we will have to “agree to dis-agree” and end this.

 

[PRmerger]

What you are saying makes no sense. How can something be sufficient ( Enough; adequate.) but not be efficacious ($10 word for effective)?

God’s grace is always “enough” for us to attain salvation. (Just like my father may have given us “enough” money to buy a house.)

But unless I apply that grace in my life it won’t save me. (Just like unless I take the money given by my father and apply it to our down payment, we won’t have a house, even if my daddy gave me all that we needed. )