Who has the possibility of salvation?

[Genesis315]

Just to add, it is through obedience to grace and following one’s conscience that one is brought to faith. St. Robert Bellarmine explained it this way, in response to Protestants that argued that the existence of non-Christians was proof that Jesus did not die for all or offer all the possibility of salvation:

St. Robert Bellarmine, De Gratis et Libero Arbitrio, lib. 2, cap. 8

This argument only proves that not all people receive the help they need to believe and be converted immediately. It does not, however, prove that some people are deprived, absolutely speaking, of sufficient help for salvation. For the pagans to whom the Gospel has not yet been preached, can know from His creatures that God exists; then they can be stimulated by God, through His preventing grace, to believe in God, that He exists and that He is the rewarder of those who seek Him: and from such faith, they can be inspired, under the guidance and help of God, to pray and give alms and in this way obtain from God a still greater light of faith, which God will communicate to them, either by Himself or through angels or through men.

Pope Francis taught the same thing about the path to faith in his first encyclical:

Pope Francis, Lumen Fidei 35:

Because faith is a way, it also has to do with the lives of those men and women who, though not believers, nonetheless desire to believe and continue to seek. To the extent that they are sincerely open to love and set out with whatever light they can find, they are already, even without knowing it, on the path leading to faith…Any-one who sets off on the path of doing good to others is already drawing near to God, is already sustained by his help, for it is characteristic of the divine light to brighten our eyes whenever we walk towards the fullness of love.

 

[Cathoholic]

Luke-Suncook:

.

Jesus is God, but he is not FULLY God. He said himself that God is Greater…and it has absolutely nothing to do with his human nature. He never said it did!

.

I asked Luke-Suncook HOW he knew Jesus never said that this was referring to His Human (not Divine) nature. As of yet no answer (admittedly, it will likely be coming from Luke-Suncook).

Again I asked Luke-Suncook HOW he knew Jesus never said such things.

This is pretty classic Unitarianism (a modern-day form of Arianism) from Luke-Suncook.

The Kingdom Hall (the Jehovah’s Witnesses) embraces this brand of home-cooked religion too.

A lot of people here (correctly) have taken issue with Luke-Suncook’s DENIAL of the Divinity of Jesus (I do too).

But in my statement, I am going to express my disappointment in you Luke-Suncook a different way.

I am going to express my disappointment in you for . . .

1. DENYING Original Sin . . .

AND

1. DENYING the full Divinity of God the FATHER!

 

[Cathoholic]

Luke-Suncook?

You around?

Three things I am still waiting on.

1 How you KNOW Jesus did not differentiate His natures to the Apostles?

2 Why not affirm Catholic doctrine on sin being an offence against God? (Denying Christ’s Divine nature, implicitly attacks this)

3 Why do you DENY God the Father’s divinity? (Denying Christ’s Divine nature, implicitly attacks God the Father as the Divine being too)

 

[fredystairs]

He’s been suspended.

I would have asked more questions of him but threre’s no point now.

 

[Cathoholic]

How can you tell he’s been suspended fredystairs?

 

[fredystairs]

Tap on his name.

 

[Vico]

He’s been suspended.

I would have asked more questions of him but threre’s no point now.

The suspension was over at of Jan 2, 3018 11:00 am.

 

[fredystairs]

I just looked at his profile and it still shows a suspension.

 

[Elf01]

Look at the date

Jan 2, 3018 11:00 am.

He’s been banned. A 1000 year suspension is how a ban is implemented on the new forums.

 

[Cathoholic]

I get it.

Thanks fredystairs, Vico, and Elf01.

OK Luke-Suncook.

I will address you as I will assume you are still reading even though you cannot be posting.

I have no idea where you are getting your denials of Jesus’ Divinity from (Unitarian?, Jehovah’s Witnesses?, self-invented?, other?), so I won’t be able to hone in on your theology as close and I will be forced to make some assumptions and put words into your mouth.

That’s not going to by my fault.

It will be your fault that you cannot answer rebuttals against you (for breaking forum rules–although I have no idea what happened there either or if it was even tied to this thread).

You come onto a Catholic Forum site and attack the Divinity of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ you have to expect rebuttals (irrespective of if you can offer a response or not).

 

[Cathoholic]

Luke-Suncook.

Your first post here (that I saw anyway) was post 35.

Here is your . . . ahem . . . “contribution”.

.

adfh wru jwfgurt wrt

.

I Googled it. It was of course, non-sense.

After reading this non-sense above (“adfh wru jwfgurt wrt”), I was trying hard to give you the benefit of a doubt (but I AM giving you the benefit of a doubt anyway–even though it is hard to) and not assume . . . you know . . . . (this) . . .

https://www.google.com/search?q=tro...AUICigB&biw=1152&bih=743#imgrc=9HrkGJHXRuTGUM:

It looks like someone gave your post of “adfh wru jwfgurt wrt” a “like” too. Interesting.

 

[Cathoholic]

Luke-Suncook.

Your next post was post 67.

You said . . .

.

I have never believed in the trinity.

.

You list yourself (religion) as “Catholic/other”

.
With you “never” believing in the Trinity the “Catholic” part of “Catholic/other” strikes me as dubious.

Referring to the Trinity you said . . .

It’s one of the most bogus and divisive doctrines that has ever entered the church and very easily refuted. It has evil origins and wish people would stop playing God with the issue and stop with the condemning attitude over it.

.

OK.

But the only “condemning attitude” I’ve seen here has been by you.

The posters have treated you very good.

Yet you come on a Catholic site and mock their (our) central beliefs.

You went on . . . .

I almost completely lost my faith . . .

.

I am very sorry to hear that Luke-Suncook.

You proceeded saying that you . . . .

. . . .took down my website over it because I was tired of being continually condemned by my own brothers and sisters over a doctrine Trinitarians admit is inexplicable and incomprehensible.

.

OK Luke-Suncook.

The fact that Trinitarian theology is “inexplicable and incomprehensible” is not necessarily a problem.

Why not?

Because if you affirm an infinite all-powerful God (I do and I assume you do too), then SOME things about God MUST be ABOVE reason.

Not contrary to reason but ABOVE mere human REASON.

This is the basic error of atheism. A denial that there is ANY truths that are above mere human reason. And you unfortunately Luke-Suncook, are falling into that trap.

You went on . . . .

.

Yet, they tell people they’re damned if they don’t believe in it.

.
Yet nobody here “damned” you Luke-Suncook.

Everyone was willing to discuss the issue reasonably (except you).

You went on to call people names . . . .

How foolish and judge-mental.

(Emphasis Luke-Suncook)

 

[Cathoholic]

The reason we affirm the doctrine of the Trinity Luke-Suncook, is not because somebody “figured it out”.

Mere earthly humans cannot do that with truths that are ABOVE reason.

These truths are called “mysteries” because of that.

We can probe them deeper, but we cannot entirely “figure it out” with mere human reason alone.

Anytime you attempt to “settle” or “complete” a mystery with mere human reason, you WILL fall into heresy. It cannot be done.

Again, with an infinite God, you would EXPECT mysteries!

As a matter-of-fact, if your “god” had NO MYSTERIES, you could assume with great certainty that this . . . . WASN’T God in the first place!

(I’ll try to go on later, on your behalf Luke-Suncook, but if the thread gets closed, I won’t be able to. But if it does, know that I am praying for you. I will go before Jesus in the Tabernacle, Jesus who is True God AND True Man, and beg Him on your behalf for gifts and graces for you. I will do that later today and if I don’t for some reason, I will then do it ASAP)

 

[Cathoholic]

Vico said in post 68 . . . .

Those that die in a state of mortal sin are damned. It is more complex matter to determine culpability.

.

In other words, its not as simple as saying “if you don’t believe in the Trinity, you are condemned”.

Vico is REACHING OUT to you here in an UN-condemning manner (something that is a 180, from your characterization, that you allege to have received by others).

.
Your response (in post 69) to Vico’s generous careful reaching out to you and clarification of Catholic doctrine?

.

I don’t believe a word you said.

.

Think about it Luke-Suncook.

Just think about your response (!) at this point.

Ask yourself if that is the reasonable way to treat someone who is trying to help you.

.

.

You went on Luke-Suncook:

there’s absolutely NO Trinitarian formula in the bible, AND it’s an evil man made doctrine.
.

Where does the Bible say, "unless there is a “formula” about a truth, we are to reject that. Unless we can find a “formula”.

Do you see the problem with this Luke-Suncook?

Do you see how YOU are inventing traditions (in this case, a “man made doctrine” that you allege to reject - presumably in principle) that are NOT in Scripture under the guise of supporting . . . . Scripture?

 

[Cathoholic]

Luke-Suncook.

Freddystairs then GAVE you a “Trinitarian formula” in post 70 . . . .

Trinitarian formula:
“Therefore, go forth and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and The Holy Spirit.” Matthew 28 : 19.

.

You promptly rejected it out of hand.

You appealed to nothing except YOURSELF.

That’s the fallacy of ipse dixit Luke-Suncook.

The fallacy of ipse dixit means “It is so, BECAUSE I say its so!”

(That type of arguing is not too convincing is it Luke-Suncook?)

Here was your response to Freddystairs . . . .

That has no bearing on the idea of the three being co-equal.

.
How do you know Luke-Suncook?

You offered no proof.

You offered only your authority.

You are running down the authority of the Church,saying it doesn’t exist, then PROCLAIMING that AUTHORITY for . . . . . YOURSELF.

Do you see the pride in that?

You are not doing away with an authoritative Church given from God.
You are merely proclaiming YOURSELF as that authority (with NO EVIDENCE, and no 2000 year pedigree to back you up).

This is arrogance Luke-Suncook. Even if the Church were wrong (and She is NOT wrong), this attitude you exhibit, is inappropriate.

 

[Cathoholic]

In post 75 you went on a “mini-rampage” . . . .

1. Why did Jesus say the Father is greater?
   .
2. Why did Jesus say that he didn’t know when he would return but only the father did?
   .
3. Jesus is called, “the son of God.” He’s is never called “God the son.”
   .
4. Why is it that the holy has NO NAME?
   .
5. Why is it the holy spirit is called, “the power of the highest?”
   .
   And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
   .
6. Why is Jesus called “mighty God” and not Almighty God?" (20:17; Rev. 3:12).
   .
7. Why is it that Acts 2:36 says: “God has made this Jesus…both Lord and Christ.” “Lord” is not the same as “God.”
   .
8. Why is it that the holy spirit IS NOT found in or around the throne of God?
   .
   Can you answer these questions? I have about 20 more!
   .
   1 Cor. 15:28 says: “When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him [God] who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.”
   AND THAT’S WHAT I BELIEVE!

(Some of your formatting not preserved by me for brevity)

Yet immediately God gave us hints as to His NON-Unitarian nature saying “Let US, make man in OUR image”.

You of course REJECT that as it doesn’t fit your traditions of men.


Eventually Jesus took literal flesh upon Himself.

Literal flesh from the Blessed Virgin Mary (a fulfillment of Him making Eve from the literal flesh of Adam)

Eventually Jesus took flesh, or a fully human nature upon Himself. Yet He is still Divine.

Jesus has a Divine nature from all eternity, and now He takes upon Himself a Human nature too.

Our Lord Jesus becomes one of us, so WE may be incorporated (and I do mean “incorporated” literally AND figuratively) into Him.

Do you not know, that you who were Baptized INTO Christ, were Baptized (Baptized by that “Trinitarian formula” incidentally that Freddystairs had referred you to) not only into Christ’s life, but into His suffering (Romans 8:17) and even His death!

Why?

So you can ALSO have a share in His Divine life and His Resurrection that’s why.

ROMANS 6:3-5 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

.
Those who were Baptized (by that “Trinitarian formula”) are Baptized INTO Jesus!

 

[Cathoholic]

Luke-Suncook. Regarding your points 1 and 2 . . .

Your Trinitarian conundrums 1 and 2 above are answered by Jesus having two natures.

1 human. 1 Divine.

Luke-Suncook. Your point 3 was . . .

Jesus is called, “the son of God.” He’s is never called “God the son.”

So what?

HEBREWS 1:1-3 1 In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. 3 He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power.

Jesus “created the world”. Hebrews 1:2 says that.

You understand nobody can “create” in that sense don’t you? Nobody except . . . God.

Notice Hebrews doesn’t say Jesus took what was created and fashioned it (this is what some people loosely call “creating” but it really isn’t “creating”).

NOT HEBREWS 1:2 a, c (but a Luke-Suncook phantom verse) 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, . . . whom also this son merely fashioned the world that God the Father created independent of this Son.
.

HEBREWS 1:2 a, c 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by a SON, . . . whom also HE CREATED the world.

God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) “spoke” into creation, the world.
.

I’ll try to do more later.

If the thread gets closed, your argument falls short by assuming sola Scriptura.

But even using sola Scriptura your arguments can be overturned.

.

When you sin you don’t sin against PART of God. You sin against God.

Since God is infinite, your sin just “keeps on giving”.

If Jesus is anything LESS than True God AND true man, you and the rest of mankind are dead in their sins.

Why?

Because their sins are not fully atoned for.

To atone for a sin that “keeps on giving”, you NEED an infinite sacrifice.

A mere man or even a perfect angel just isn’t good enough.

(The Fathers used this argument against the Arian heretics.

Dr. Hahn discusses it in more detail in an audio series called “Christ in the Creeds and in the Councils.” Or some such name.

Get it!

It is out of “print” but if you called St. Joseph Communications I am sure they would be happy to accommodate your request or you can nose around on the internet.)

As I said. If the thread is not closed, I will attempt to get back here soon on your behalf Luke-Suncook. (I just had an unexpected call from a very holy Catholic Priest friend of mine. I asked him to pray for you. He did right on the phone immediately. I will be praying for you too Luke. May God bless you.)

 

[Vico]

Look at the date

Vico:

Jan 2, 3018 11:00 am.

He’s been banned. A 1000 year suspension is how a ban is implemented on the new forums.

Oh, thank you! I thought it said 2018.

 

[Elf01]

I suspected as much.

 

[Tess]

Romans 10:8 onwards