"Works" Salvation? Part 2

[Pax]

Sorry, I did not mean to say you in particular were being deceptive. That was a general comment aimed at the more well known catholic apologists

What in my description of RC teaching makes you think i do not understand? I am fully aware there is more to it, I was just trying to be succinct.

I’ll point to only one thing to start with. You made a remark about “cooperation.” It would appear to me that you do not realize that the Catholic Church teaches that even our cooperation is the result of God’s grace.

Comments?

 

[kaycee]

So, let’s see what Paul says to Christians about things that can affect our salvation. I will let scripture be its own context and those that read the passages can judge for themselves if I have misused them.

You start with a false assumption that everything listed below pertains to salvation.

In chapter 4, Paul says that he isn’t aware of anything against himself, but he says that he is not acquitted and that the Lord** judges** him.

Totally out of context, salvation is not at all mentioned. The context is verse 1. “So then, men ought to regard us as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the secret things of God.”

In chapter 5 Paul speaks of all kinds of serious immorality that has been reported among the members of the Church at Corinth including the toleration of a man living with his father’s wife, and goes on to mention greedy people, robbers, revilers, drunkards, and idolators.

Again, this is a rebuke for the church for not expelling this person, not judging his salvation.

Please take note that all of the saved in the OT are saved in the same way we are. They followed the supernatual rock which is Christ and they were saved in an anticipatory fashion by Jesus sacrifice on the cross. Nevertheless, many displeased God and were overthrown in the wilderness. They never made it to the promised land and they were destroyed. Likewise, we can lose salvation by squandering our inheritance as they did. This is precisely why Paul says, “these things happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come. Therefore let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall.”

The idea that everyone that left Egypt was saved is false. This talks about falling into sin, not losing salvation.

 

[kaycee]

I’ll point to only one thing to start with. You made a remark about “cooperation.” It would appear to me that you do not realize that the Catholic Church teaches that even our cooperation is the result of God’s grace.
Comments?

Council of Trent.
If any one saith, that the good works of the one that is justified are in such manner the gifts of God, that they are not also the good merits of him that is justified, by the good works which he performs through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ, whose living member he is, and does not truly merit increase in grace, eternal life, and the attainment of eternal life, if so be, that he depart in grace, and an increase in glory, let him be anathema

 

[Pax]

Yes, yes, yes, and yes to Trent. Go read the rest of its canons and also read the catechism of the Church and you will still see that all of this is still by way of grace. This is the part that you wish to deny, but that is Catholic teaching.

 

[Pax]

You start with a false assumption that everything listed below pertains to salvation.
…
…
Totally out of context, salvation is not at all mentioned.

I did not start with a false assumption. You are assuming that nothing that Paul says in this letter in the way of warnings pertains to salvation when the context clearly shows that it does. You are also incorrect in your view of those that left Egypt. You are straddled with a belief in OSAS which wreaks havoc with understanding God’s desire for those that left Egypt under the leadership of Moses. God set “His” people free and they followed the rock and the rock was Jesus. They were following Jesus just as we are but in an anticipatory fashion as opposed to our following Jesus post passion, death, and resurrection. Those that fell into idolatry and rebellion without repentence displeased God and fell from God’s favor which he lavishly poured out on them.

I also pointed out what Paul says in 2 Corinthians about his first letter. That absolutely clinched it…Paul explicitly stated that his warnings referred to salvation when he said, “godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation.” Please take note; I did not make an assumption about 1st Corinthians applying to salvation. Paul in his second letter clearly states that his first letter pertains to salvation.

I took these scriptures at their face value without any preconceived ideas. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians and his own comments about what he wrote are crystal clear.

 

[kaycee]

Yes, yes, yes, and yes to Trent. Go read the rest of its canons and also read the catechism of the Church and you will still see that all of this is still by way of grace. This is the part that you wish to deny, but that is Catholic teaching.

Does one recieve grace by doing good works?

Does one receive grace thru the sacraments?

Are the prayers and supplications of the saints and Mary added to the treasury of merit?

 

[onenow1]

Does one recieve grace by doing good works?

Does one receive grace thru the sacraments?

Are the prayers and supplications of the saints and Mary added to the treasury of merit?

Hi, I think these verses apply to works.

Matt. 6:4, your almsgiving must be secret, and your father who sees all things that are done in secret, will reward you.

Mark. 10: 21, Jesus looked steadily at him and he was filled with love for him, and said, you need to do one thing more, go sell everything you own and give the money to the poor,and you will have treasure in heaven; then come follow me.

Peace

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Isn’t it true that God’s grace flows through the works we do?

Isn’t it a Mortal sin to ever raise an impediment to God’s grace?

It just seem to me that we cooperate with God’s grace by not raising impediments to it and by letting it flow through good works.

That doesn’t negate us Doing the works–doing those works might require sweat or bearing a cross

When Jesus died for us on the cross He let grace and love flow throughout the saving WORK that He did on the cross.

Faith and grace always come first but saving grace and saving faith always FLOW.

Where the grace only and faith only people have it wrong is they think that the grace that initiates or the faith that initiates is good enough apart from its flowing!

That is ridiculous!

The works crowd is wrong if they think that after grace or faith that sequentially and subsequently that doing the work completes a two-part process.

There aren’t two parts to the process there is just one flowing motion!

Therefore the Discrete faith or grace only people are wrong and the Discrete works added to the initial faith or grace people are wrong!

Does Trent say two things? Yes! Does Trent say Two Discrete things? No!

Catholics do believe that anytime God’s grace is broken in an individual that he is in a state of mortal sin and will go to Hell if he doesn’t get back into the continual flow of grace which always flows through works.

The bottom real line is this: if you believe in Jesus you have faith–that faith flows through you bearing crosses sometimes. When you’re facing a Cross that the Lord wants you to carry you aren’t facing a choice of to bear it or not bear it. You’re facing a choice of LETTING God’s grace continue to flow so you will bear it

Or

Raising an impediment to God’s grace and breaking that flow of grace so your small cross is not born.

When you do bear those crosses it isn’t You that accomplish bearing them–even though you may feel the small agony of bearing them–it is God working His grace through you and through those crosses that gets those crosses born!

What you’re left with is Total Freedom of Will and Total saving grace and faith from God.

That occurrs because faith and grace are flowing and continual and because you can’t Create that flow like God does so you can’t Positively choose it–

Your choice isn’t “plus” or “minus” but “neutral” or “minus”.

Minus = you raise an impediment and interrupt the flow of faith and grace and go to Hell.

Neutral = you do nothing and that nothing is the way that you cooperate with flowing faith and grace that saves you.

That cooperation is a neutral positive nothing–that way God does indeed do all the saving work while we still get to cooperate in it!

 

[byrdele]

I grew up a cradle Catholic, became born again (and I really did have a born again experience, skyrockets and all) and went over to Protestantism, most of which teaches salvation by works and once saved always saved. Not all do.

Before I start, I am not insulting any denomination or person. To me a Christian is a Christian. I don’t really usually care about the differences as long as we all recognise that it is Christ and Christ alone Who saves and Who must be preached. I have good Christian fellowship with Christians from all denominations. But I felt I had too answer some of the statements made.

This might seem off topic, but bear with me please. How many Protestant denomination were formed during the Reformation and how many have split off from them, leaving us with a lot of Protestaant denominations which have split on every issue from no baptism (Antibaptists, such as Amish), to ordination of women to… whatever? You name it, and denominations split off from one another all the time. One split off was sad - the Episcopal Methodist Church, predominately African American, had to be formed because whites in the newly formed denomination of Methodism (and yes, I know it started off as a revival movement in the Anglican church) would not sit with them.

So now. Which church has the ultimate truth? Do I believe in once saved always saved by grace and works are evidence or do I believe the that we are saved by grace and that faith and works cannot be separated so that it is possible to walk away from God? Among many other issues.

I am honestly more secure in my relationship with Christ back in Catholicism than any Protestant once saved always saved through faith only denomination. Scripture does indicate that one can walk away from salvation, the prodigal (I recently learned that we call him the “lost”) son did so. But did God bring about the circumstances which caused him to “come to his senses”? He had nowhere to go but back home. If I walk away, God will pursue me as He does the lost sheep. Or He will bring about circumstances which should bring me to my senses. Once being brought to my senses, I can still choose to wallow in the pigpen, but more often than not, I am going to return to Him.

God makes it clear that faith and works cannot exist without the other. Paul says if he has faith and no charity then he is like a gong. James says faith without works is dead. Paul talks about working out our salvation in fear (awe of God) and trembling. The parables, which I know some people do not feel teach salvation doctrine but I do, show that over and over again we can walk away. They also show that God will actively in one way or another pursue us. So it must be awfully hard to truly lose one’s salvation.

I do not maintain my grace with works. The works cannot be separated from the faith. Since having come back to the Catholic Church God has taken me so far in my relationship with Him that I want to obey Him because I love Him, not because I am afraid that I will lose the grace He has given me. When we say “works is evidence of faith” or “works and faith are inseparable”, we’re actually saying the same thing. Yes, works are evidence of faith because without the faith, the works would not be there because, and here comes the Catholic doctrine, works and faith are inseparable. We’re really just stating the same thing in different words, as I see it.

My suggestion to people who continue to try to argue down Catholic doctrine on salvation or anything: These doctrines of the Catholic Church have been passed down for millenia. Try reading the works of the early Church Fathers who were taught by the very disciples of Jesus. You might be surprised on what they have to say.

God bless you all.

byrdele

 

[Church_Militant]

A good response byrdele.

I have some idea of how you feel. It’s tough when others aggressively seek to evangelize you instead of fellowshipping with you though isn’t it?

 

[Truthstalker]

Let me try a different tack.

Faith does not save us. Grace does not save us. Works do not save us. We do not save us. Our theology does not save us. Christ saves us. Christ decides whether we go to heaven. If we put the emphasis on anything except Christ, we are missing the boat. If we focus on our faith, we are not focusing on Christ. If we focus on Christ, the faith is a necessary by-product. If we focus on Christ, He gives us grace and salvation. If we focus on Christ, we will desire to follow Him. If we focus on Christ, He will teach us to obey Him and do good works.

And how do we focus on Christ? He gives us the gift. He calls us. We call that calling grace. We call the power He gives us to focus on Him grace. We call the power to do good works that He gives us grace. All is a gift of the One Who calls us. He is the One Who gives grace to make it through the race, the One Who leads us home. We trust Him, not ourselves, not our theology, not our works, not our memories, not our understanding.

He is the way, the truth, and the life. Everything else is incidental.

 

[Pax]

Does one recieve grace by doing good works?

Does one receive grace thru the sacraments?

Are the prayers and supplications of the saints and Mary added to the treasury of merit?

You have failed to adequately address the 1 Corinthians’ presentation and have thus jumped to something new . Okay, I’ll bite.

Let’s see what scripture has to say about grace and the sacraments. There is plenty to be said on this subject but I will limit my comments to the sacrament of baptism.

Baptism

ACTS 2:38
And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

ACTS 19:1-7
While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.” And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve of them in all.

ACTS 22:16
And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

GALATIANS 3:27
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

1 PETER 3:21
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

There are other passages of scripture that pertain to baptismal regeneration but this should be sufficient to show that this sacrament does confer grace. Similarly the other sacraments are also outward signs instituted by Christ to give grace and there is scripture to support examples of them as well.

Moreover, God’s grace is not given to us only once. God’s grace is given to us throughout our lives. Furthermore, we can actually impart grace to one another. Scripture says so in the following verse:

Romans 4:29
Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for edifying, as fits the occasion, that it may** impart grace to those who hear**.

You also asked about works and the treasury of merit. You need to be aware that Catholic teaching in **no way **says that we save ourselves or that our merit is the same as that of Jesus by way of the cross. Christian merit in the Catholic sense pertains to how the merits of Jesus are applied to us. The previous quote from Romans 4:29 is an example.

As Christians we are members of the body of Christ. We are told to love one another, and we are told that not even death can separate those that are in Christ. Paul tells us in Colossians 1:24 that “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,” This is pretty powerful stuff for Paul to say, and he wasn’t even in heaven. In saying this Paul isn’t suggesting that he is somehow providing salvation for us because of some kind of deficiency in the complete work of Christ. Afterall, Christ’s passion, death and resurrection are sufficient to save all men. We know, however, that not all will be saved. This a reference to how salvation is applied to us and brought to us. Paul is following what Jesus said in the gospel. He, as a disciple, has picked up his cross daily and followed Jesus. His preaching and his suffering have merit and they have an effect in the plan of salvation. What Paul did became part of the treasury of merit.

Here is another verse that shows the part played by Christian love in the treasury of merit.

1 Peter 4:8
Above all hold unfailing your love for one another, since love covers a multitude of sins.

Once again, this refers to the application of the complete work of Christ to the individual. It is clear that Paul merited benefits for the Church. Likewise, Mary and the other saints have a part in this as well. The catechism does a great job of explaining merit from the Catholic perspective, and the church makes it clear that Christian merit does not encroach upon the complete work of Christ.

I hope this helps.

 

[apophasis]

Sean Boyle:

The phase “then he is no longer a believer” are your words. The o.p. didn’t say that, nor imply it. The answer still stands. If a believer falls into some dought regarding faith, confession is the answer.

To “pull the plug” MUST mean loss of salvation. If it doesn’t mean that then “guano” had better be more explicit as to how he’s using the phrase.

But if one loses his salvation (as RC’ism believes is possible, and which I believe “guano” meant by “pull the plug”) then one must FIRST conclude he actually possessed the salvation he just lost. And, SECOND, all that God had done for him through faith in Christ must be divinely reversed, returning this pitiful creature to his “natural” state, no longer "in Christ, but again “in Adam,” spiritually dead (1 Cor. 2:14).

Sean, what you, guanophor, Pax and Mikeledes don’t understand and refuse to accept (personally believe), is the POWER God has to save, forever, the one who believes in (trusts in, rests in) the Person and sacrificial work of His Son, alone. Oh you believe Christ went to the cross and was there sacrificed for sins, but you refuse to believe God has the POWER to actually save based on that wonderful, atoning work alone. It’s as what Paul said to the Corinthians:1 Cor. 15:1-2 "Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain."Paul demanded from the Corinthians that they “hold fast” to not only the gospel of salvation he presented to them, but also the words in which he presented it. Otherwise they will have believed “in vain.” To believe “in vain” is to not hold to the whole gospel of divine salvation which Paul preached to them.

He presents to them the possibility of belief on an inadequate basis. A belief that falls short of Paul’s words regarding divine justification, reconciliation, propitiation, identification, and eternal life through personal faith in Christ alone.

If men’s grip of Paul’s gospel is such that they are not really trusting in Christ, and Him alone, then their “belief” is groundless and empty. It’s not a saving-faith at all.

Paul essentially writes in the same tone to the Galatians. Some of them had fallen short of his gospel and were now seeking to be justified by works rather than through faith in Christ alone. They did not hold fast to his word, his gospel:Gal. 3:1-4 “You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed {as} crucified? This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of law, or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain – if indeed it was in vain?”

Gal. 3:22 "But the Scripture has shut up all men under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe"Those who were seeking to be justified by works actually believed “in vain.” Such faith was totally inadequate to be classified as “saving-faith.” It was religious faith, not saving, and as Paul stated, Christ was of no benefit to them.

 

[apophasis]

guanophore:

No,but your concept of salvation also does not fit with the scriptures either. One does not attain salvation until the Last Day

So then, contrary to what you stated in an earlier post, one cannot “unplug” himself from something he is never actually “plugged into” in the first place. The RC idea of “Last Day” salvation is based on its meritorious system.

However, my concept of salvation is totally congruent with that which is clearly presented in Scripture, especially according to Paul’s gospel:Titus 3:4-7 "But when the kindness of God our Savior and {His} love for mankind appeared, He saved us, NOT on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness (you catch that Pax???), but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His GRACE we would be made heirs according to {the} hope of eternal life…"Notice that it is “God our Savior” through “Jesus Christ our Savior” and that He “saved us.” It’s the RC notion that “one does not attain salvation until the Last Day” that is totally incongruent with Paul’s gospel, as well as the salvation teachings found in all the other N.T. Epistles which present salvation as a work of God through the redemptive work of Christ on the cross alone. Men benefiting, giftwise, by His finished work through personal faith in Him.

I do, however, submit to the fact that my concept of salvation does not align itself with that of Rome’s. But this is the fundamental difference between us - I with Paul, you with Rome.

so even if a person has fallen from the state of grace infused at baptism, one can be restored through repentance, unless one persistently resists the Holy Spirit until death.

That “state of grace” Rome says is “infused” into the soul at baptism is righteousness. It is what you call “initial” justification." So if one “falls” as you say, from that “state of grace,” he is no longer justified. And “intial” justification, based on RC’ism, is achieved through ritual, water baptism. Hence, to stay consistent with its own soteriology, the only way one who has “fallen” from his “initial” justification can be restored is to be re-baptized.

Now, based on Rome’s theology, one snuffs out this “initial” justification by committing a “mortal” sin. The soul no longer “infused.” Basing this notion on John’s passage in 1 John 5. However, Rome only assumes John is talking about the loss of divine justification here. And John never actually tells us what that “sin unto death” is. But if we accept Rome’s interpretation, then John himself would be at odds with Christ who previously said that ALL sins shall be forgiven the sons of men except if he blasphemes against the Holy Spirit (Mk. 3:28). And this one exception pertains only to unbelievers since, in context, it entails unbelief in the Person and work of Jesus Christ, claiming the works he accomplished before them were of demonic origin. And John himself states that no one who is “born of God” sins (being “in Christ”) and that Christ Himself keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him (1 Jn. 5:18).

Bottom line, Rome’s soteriology is at odds with Christ’s own words and those of John.

A person who is not acting in faith is not the same as an unbeliever. Remember when Paul confronted Peter about his hypocrisy of no longer eating with gentiles? Peter was acting in a faithless manner (not behaving in accordance with his own beliefs about salvation) but that did not return him to the Adamic state.

But guano, your reply with a person unplugging himself was in context to my reply to Pax where I listed many of the acts of God on behalf of the one who believes in Christ. Here’s what I said:

If you give me a whole list of verses YOU think Paul is teaching a true believer, now co-crucified, co-buried and co-resurrected with Christ; translated from Adam to Adam; justified, giftwise, by faith through Christ’s redemptive work (Rom. 3:24); now reconciled to God through the death of His Son, can lose all this that God Himself accomplished for him through Christ, then please provide me with the proper context as well.

Show me that Paul clearly teaches that all of the above are divinely reversed…

Your response was that a “believer” can unplug himself from all these things. But the revealed, divine reality is that a true believer cannot “unplug” himself from being “in Christ,” “made righteous,” anymore than an unbeliever can “unplug” himself from being in Adam, made a sinner (Rom. 5:19).

 

[apophasis]

mikeledes:

I agree with most of your analysis except for the above. Paul goes from generalities to specifics. The transition from generalties to specifics occurs in verses 17-22.

Actually you agree with none of it. Paul makes no transition from generalities to specifics, from universals to particulars. He is always addressing “Gentiledom” in general in Romans chapter eleven.

 

[apophasis]

mikeledes:

No offense, but this has to be the most outrageous claim I have ever heard. Jesus consistently taught about salvation and salvation is always rooted in His atoning work on the Cross.

I agree salvation is always rooted in Christ’s atoning work on the cross. NEVER in our works, or even the so-called “grace works” Pax argues as an added basis for salvation.

But Jesus did not teach salvation in the context of the crosss, since that event was yet future when He taught the parables. For this reason, if you want to truly understand salvation, this side of the cross, and in light of it, you must turn to the Epistles - especially Pauline. By divine revelation Paul was given great insight into this “mystery of Christ” (Eph. 3:3-5).

As we’ve discussed before, Mike, the doctrines of salvation, in light of the historical, finished work of Christ on the cross, are presented and fully explained in the Epistles, not Christ’s parables.

 

[apophasis]

byrdele:

Who says that Christ did not teach the doctrines of salvation? Yes, He did.

Can you show me where Jesus teaches specifically about justification, redemption, propitiation, identification, sanctification, etc. in the parables?

Why would Jesus give Paul insight into the mystery of Himself if He’d already disclosed it all to Israel? And why would he teach these post-cross mysteries to unbelievers? Truths that are addressed to faith and concern only believers.

I’m not saying Jesus didn’t teach about salvation. In fact He spoke a lot about eternal life through faith in Him alone. And He specifically presented Himself as the object of salvation faith. But He did not disclose to them the “doctrines of salvation” which could only be presented and fully understood AFTER His sacrificial, substitutionary death, burial, bodily resurrection and ascension. ALL on which the “doctrines of salvation” are based.

 

[apophasis]

Pax:

Your accusations about context are laughable.

Oh, I don’t think so.

I also invite you to comment on my presentation on Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians.

I think Kaycee handled your Corinthian argument quite well. No need for me to add to it. It would just be repetitious.

His observation about you, however, is the same as mine, and one on which I’ve confronted you before. Your fundamental error, Pax, is that you interpret all the exhortations in Scripture for the redeemed in Chist to live obedient, godly lives as conditional, i.e., threats to their salvation. This, of course, being consistent with RC’ism’s “Last Day” salvation.

But as I’ve pointed out to you before, your interpretation is apropos for the legalistic mind-set. A mind-set which simply cannot grasp the power of the gospel message of the cross of Christ, the power by which God saves, forever, any sinner who looks (by faith) to the finished work of His beloved Substitute on their behalf, alone.

God saves on the basis of no other work than that of Christ’s sacrificial work on the cross. No writer of the Epistles teaches salvation through so-called “works of grace” which God works in/through the believer. They have no redemptive value.

Scripture reveals that God justifies men on the basis of Christ’s redemptive work on the cross alone (Rom. 3:24); and that the justified are then kept by Christ’s present, High Priestly, intercessory work in heaven, alone (1 Jn. 2:1-2).

 

[Pax]

I agree salvation is always rooted in Christ’s atoning work on the cross. NEVER in our works, or even the so-called “grace works” Pax argues as an added basis for salvation.
…
…

Could you please explain why it is that you have twisted what has been said to you rather than simply addressing all of the scriptural evidence that has been given to you? You keep insisting on calling my/our view “works,” or in your latest statement “grace works,” as an added basis for our salvation.

Please find anywhere on this forum where I have described our position in these terms or equivalent terms of “an added basis for our salvation.” God’s saving grace is described in scripture and I have repeatedly shown you many varied passages that show exactly what is wrought in the Christian by way of God’s grace. God does not simply impute Christ’s righteousness. He truly wants us to be righteous and the “power” of his grace is what causes that righteousness to happen.

Revelation 22:11-13 says, “Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and holy still be holy. See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me to repay according to everyone’s work, I am the Alpha and the Omega…”

Revelation 21:27 tells us that nothing unclean will enter heaven and that includes “anyone” that practices abomination or falsehood."

In Phil 2:12-13 it says, “Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed me, not only in my presence, but much more now in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure.”

Meditate on these scriptures. See what God wants for us and meditate on how that is acheived by way of grace and the merits of Jesus. We are temples of the Holy Spirit, we are in Christ, and Christ is in us. Are these things true of the demons that James says “believe”? Of course not, and they are not true of any evil doer that also believes that Jesus is the son of God and savior of man. They believe, but they do not live in the spirit.

You make false distinctions and remove the power of God as it is applied in the Christian by God’s grace. The entire notion that righteousness is “only” imputed" is utterly false and scripture makes this clear in many places.

 

[Pax]

Oh, I don’t think so.I think Kaycee handled your Corinthian argument quite well. No need for me to add to it. It would just be repetitious.

His observation about you, however, is the same as mine, and one on which I’ve confronted you before. Your fundamental error, Pax, is that you interpret all the exhortations in Scripture for the redeemed in Chist to live obedient, godly lives as conditional, i.e., threats to their salvation. This, of course, being consistent with RC’ism’s “Last Day” salvation.

But as I’ve pointed out to you before, your interpretation is apropos for the legalistic mind-set. A mind-set which simply cannot grasp the power of the gospel message of the cross of Christ, the power by which God saves, forever, any sinner who looks (by faith) to the finished work of His beloved Substitute on their behalf, alone.

God saves on the basis of no other work than that of Christ’s sacrificial work on the cross. No writer of the Epistles teaches salvation through so-called “works of grace” which God works in/through the believer. They have no redemptive value.

Scripture reveals that God justifies men on the basis of Christ’s redemptive work on the cross alone (Rom. 3:24); and that the justified are then kept by Christ’s present, High Priestly, intercessory work in heaven, alone (1 Jn. 2:1-2).

Try dropping the insults and at least “attempt” to mount a refutation. I nailed the context.