"Works" Salvation?

[DLC]

How do you that the teaching magesterium is guided by the Holy Spirit?

Aren’t they just men? Yes.

What makes them fallible if they are sinfull men?

 

[guanophore]

Guano, to challenge some of the teachings is not "bashing."When have you EVER seen me suggest to anyone that he/she should leave the CC?

This post indicates that you believe, once any Catholic here accepts your teaching, they will, on their own, choose to leave the church. I think promoting your understanding of salvation is intended for this purpose. You are clearly not here to learn about Catholicism, so your agenda must be evangelizing the lost.

when a Catholic, through the work of the Holy Spirit, finally does come to understand what God accomplished for him through Christ's* substitutionary sin-sacrifice*, he usually finds that he just cannot return to a church that does not understand or teach this glorious, Biblical truth. His desire then is to fellowship with those who do.  Most often Protestants don't tell a Catholic he must not attend a Catholic church, but the *newly-enlightened* Catholic simply seeks fellowship with those who are like minded regarding Christ's *substitutionary* death, with whom they rejoice in what God has done.

May you grow in the GRACE and knowledge of the cross of Christ. It’s the cross that makes Christ Savior.

If sounds to me like you are expecting that all the Catholics here will grow in grace, come under the influence of this doctrinal position, and choose to leave the church as a result.

In this post, you are saying that, because Catholics don’t believe like you do, they are in “unbelief”. I find that approach rather “bashing”

Actually, Catholics, in unbelief, are still dealing with sins, sacramentally, that God dealt with, once and for all, 2000 years ago. What RC’ism does not accept is the divinely, revealed truth that God had His Judgment Day on sin at the cross of Christ when our sins were imputed to Christ and He died in our stead (Jn. 1:29; 3:14-18). Since then the message to “believe” what He has done has gone out into the world.

This post says that the sacramental method of dealing with sins is based on unbelief. This is a baseless and inaccurate assertion that is frankly rather insulting.

What you refuse to comprehend, in respect to obtaining salvation and eternal life, is that there is nothing a Christian can do “for Christ.” For salvation one must believe what Christ has already done, completely and perfectly, for you. That’s what it means to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Here you are saying that thinking dfferently than you is a “refusal to comprehend”. this is not the same as a soteriological disagreement. It is saying that, because Catholics don’t believe as you do, that we resist the Holy Spirit, and refuse the truth. That also seems rather “bashing” to me.

According to the Scriptures redemption is not a cooperative effort, as RC’ism teaches

Here you are asserting that your own private interpretation of scripture is correct, and that the RC church is wrong. This is not just putting forth a difference of opinion.

 

[guanophore]

Guano, to challenge some of the teachings is not "bashing."When have you EVER seen me suggest to anyone that he/she should leave the CC?

QUOTE=apophasis;1508225 ] “Commandment keeping” is not essential for salvation. …No mention of obedience to commandments, only faith in the One who was delivered up for him.
… good works… this error is not uncommon for those who refuse to accept the full substitutionary aspect of the cross of Christ. If you don’t get the cross right you’ll be off in everything else in your soteriology (as you demonstrate by the content of your posts). Compare it to building a house, start out with a poor foundation and you’ll struggle with everything you try to build upon it. … Put the horse in front of the cart and you’ll start moving - even growing in grace.

This post appears to advocate that keeping the commandments are not essential. It also indicates that the reader “refuses” as if there is some hardness of heart and resistance to the “truth of the gospel” that you are promoting. It also implies that the reader is not moving or growing in grace. These are pretty personal statements, and although they may be rooted in your doctrine, certainly can be perceived as attempting to lure Catholics away from their faith, and finding them deficient in faith if they don’t give it up.

So the only way RC’ism could get around this clear, unambiguous teaching of Scripture was to attach the word “initial” to justification. A concept totally foreign to Scripture.

This comment seems to imply that the Catholic Church is some howe trying to “get around” scripture, because it is not interpreted the way that you do.

And this is why the whole RC doctrine of "*initial*" justification falls flat on its face being in blatant contradiction to God's revealed, written Word - written to, but ignored by, the church of Rome:

I have read this type of statement in several of your posts, where you say that RC doctrine “falls flat on it’s face” and that the Church ignores scripture, makes “blatant contradiction” to the Word. You have continued to make these accusatory remarks, in spite of everything that you have been shown about what the church actually does teach, and stubbornly cling to your notion of what you perceive is taught, when your perception is inaccurate.

The tragedy is that once faith was separated from ritual baptism (baptising infants), baptism took on a soteriological life all its own within the church. And men began to put their faith in the ritual, assigning soteriological powers to it, which belong only to Christ Himself and personal faith in Him alone.

here you are saying that 1) faith is separated from baptism (as though you are assumng faith does not exist in the sacrament) and that it is “tragic” that Catholics put faith in the sacraments.

 

[Odell]

The point being, you cannot enter salvation through the efforts of any king of law keeping - of ANY kind. This would include the Ten Commandments. "For by grace you have been saved through FAITH…not as a result of works.“Jn. 3:14-18.Through the teachings of men that is what it evolved into. But based on God’s Word alone (which does not change) there is no "and” after the word “believe.” “Do” is not an added condition but a natural consequence of those “created in Christ Jesus” for those good works.

here is your AND
(Mt 19: 16-17) “Now someone approached him and said, teacher what good must I do to gain eternal life? If you wish to enter life keep the commandments.” Notice Jesus did not say just except me as you personal Lord and savior and that’s it. No Jesus said to enter eternal life you must do something, keep the commandments.

and acording to you

Originally Posted by apophasis
AMEN! And this is where RCism falls short of the gospel. It keeps its devotees bound to law prohibiting them from entering fully into grace.

“It was for freedom that Christ set up free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be a subject again to a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 5:1)

Abiding by the ten comandment is being subject again to slavery?
Thats what you are saying.

I Honestly do not see how you can answer this. But i will give you a shot.

Are you telling us that the ten commandments are makeing us subject to slavery because ITS THE LAW? :coffeeread:
Surly not murdering or stealing or going to Church on the Sabbath are makeing us subject to the works of the flesh.

So you dont mean that. So do you belive that The commandments fall under a different kind of law? Or YOU mean doing good is not equal to doing works of the Law. :newidea:

Great thanks for clearing that up.

Again if I got it wrong please let us know. Im confused you are now sideing with us catholics I did not think it was going to be that easy.

Giving to the poor is not a condition on which salvation hinges. You may* freely* give but not as a condition for salvation or it is no longer an act of love, but an act of obedience to law. And by the works of law no flesh will be jusified in His sight (Rom. 3:20).

we will just forget you said this because its not what you meant.

Actually, I do, Paul’s lays it out clearly in Romans 7. Romans 7:22-25

22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man,
23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members.
24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?
25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

thanks for makeing this clear there is the law of God and the law of sin.

Ooooooooo…I’ve got ten demerits points toward offing me from the forum for saying two things far more charitable than that. :tsktsk:

actually brother this was a quote from a book and in no way was intended for you but the book was written for Catholics:thumbsup:

Where?Christ said that the law and prophets depend on the two commandments he had given; he said that, because He had been accused of trying to abolish the law, and He was ensuring that no one misunderstood Him concerning that (cf Mt 5:17; Dt. 6:5; Lev 19:18). The moral law has not been abolished.

would the ten commandments fall under this Law? Because someone used to believe that we did not have to adhire to them.

It seems your Church understands the necessity, and the difficulty of keeping the law perfectly—a difficulty that you downplay—by providing a means of forgiveness, and reconciliation.
.

Are you saying that haveing a means of forgiveness and reconciliation are not improtant?

 

[guanophore]

Guano, to challenge some of the teachings is not "bashing."When have you EVER seen me suggest to anyone that he/she should leave the CC? Now, admittedly, I have challenged some of its stated, soteriological doctrines (that’s what this particular thread is all about), and I have challenged some of your personal interpretations of Scriptural passages. But I (nor Sandusky) have EVER hinted to the idea of you or anyone leaving the CC. That is no concern of mine, and I would take the liberty to say that it is not the concern of Sandusky either.

Actually, Apo, you do not challenge the stated soteriological doctrines. What you challenge are your perceptions of those doctrines. In reading your posts, I can find no evidence that you have ever studied the Catholic doctrines. I do note,however, that you seem to gleefully pounce on Catholics who either don’t understand them well, or cannot articulate them well. Perhaps I was wrong? Maybe you are only here for entertainment purposes? I think in my previous post I gave a good example of at least a “hint” that Catholics leave. You stated that, when Catholics come to the knowledge of the truth, they choose to leave. As far as challenging my personal interpretations, you have not. I have never given them! In truth, I have been taking exercise in arguing the position of the Catholic Church. I thought it best that I not contaminate my exercise with my own personal beliefs.

Your problem, Mike, is that you’ve adopted the false teaching that “everything else He asks you to do” determines your salvation status, rendering salvation not by grace (unmerited divine favor) through faith, but by self-works. But Paul explicitly teaches us, “not as a result of works, that no one should boast.”

This post clearly states that another forum member has a “problem” because he "adopted false teaching: (Catholicism) This is more than a doctrinal disagreement, but an attempt on your part to convince the reader that his faith in Catholic teaching is erroneous and problematic.

Until one first realizes and accepts this truth, he can never be expected to understand the Biblical revelation of the Rapture. And debating with RCs on this subject will alway be futile since they will not, nor cannot, accept anything their magesterium has not. Which can be compared to the Jew in Christ’s day saying, “although all You say and do points to you as Messiah, we will not embrace you unless our religious leaders do.”

This quote illustrates your contention that Roman Catholics cannot understand what scrupture teaches correctly unless they abandon the magesterium (leave the church). How is this not a suggestion that Catholics, in search of the real truth, will only be able to find it outside the Church?

There are not a whole lot of Prots. that post on this forum, but I have yet to see any one of them suggest a Catholic become a “Baptist” or “Lutheran” or “Methodist.”

It is not necessary to invite someone to join another denomination in order to try to pursuade them to leave own church.

Would you be more comfortable if Prots. were not allowed on the forum? That was once a queston raised here and the majority of Catholics said they enjoyed their presence and the task of the challenge.

No, in reviewing your posts, I realize that the best and strongest times of the church is in fighting error. It will probably be good for people here to tangle with you, even though you are not here to learn, but to convert. I am weary of the degrading of Catholicism, but I think that is part and parcel of what comes with error. In either case, it really doesn’t matter what I think about you being here. What matters is the forum rules, and whether or not you are abiding by them. It is not my place to judge that.

 

[Pax]

How do you that the teaching magesterium is guided by the Holy Spirit?

Aren’t they just men? Yes.

What makes them fallible if they are sinfull men?

The apostle Peter committed a number of sins and we know this from scripture. He was admonished by Jesus, he denied Jesus, and he was upbraided by Paul for hypocrisy. Nevertheless, Peter went on to write two infallible epistles and he infallibly guided the church. Peter even made infallible proclamations at the first Council of Jerusalem.

Likewise, Paul says that he was a sinner, yet he too wrote infallible letters. The same can be said for the rest of the NT authors as well as those of the OT.

All of the infallible proclamations that are made by the Church are done so via** the protection of the Holy Spirit**. Please keep in mind that these proclamations are limited to matters of faith and morals. The church has clarified and refined all of the apostolic teachings handed down to us. The Church has been protected from doing this erroneously. If this were not the case the Church would never have been able to give definition to such things as the Trinity and the two natures in the person of Christ that were so necessary in repelling the heresies that grew up against the truth. This pattern has been repeated over and over again.

Can you imagine what would become of Jesus promises concerning the Church if there was no infallibility? When Jesus said that “what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and what you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven,” he set up infallibility. If the Church bound errors on faith and morals upon the members then those errors would be bound in heaven. Nothing unclean can enter heaven and no error will be bound or loosed in heaven either.

 

[Keikiolu]

How do you that the teaching magesterium is guided by the Holy Spirit?

Aren’t they just men? Yes.

What makes them fallible if they are sinfull men?

What makes YOU “infallible” in your interpretation of scripture? How do YOU have guidance from the Holy Spirit?

If you have it, why can’t they have it?

(( I shall leave it to others to explain how the Pope/Magisterium was given the gift of infallibility (via Peter) in matters of faith and morals. ))

(( In fact, it’s probably been explained several times in this very thread. ))

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[Milliardo]

How do you that the teaching magesterium is guided by the Holy Spirit?

Aren’t they just men? Yes.

What makes them fallible if they are sinfull men?

You mean what makes the infallible if they are sinful men, right? Anyway, what makes you think the Apostles were guided by the Holy Spirit? Because the Bible said so? That obviously wouldn’t work for early Christians, who neither had the Bible nor their writings; they had to rely on what they taught orally. Given that then, aren’t they then men as well who are sinful? So, what made them infallible? And, going a step further, less than half of them wrote anything; does that mean those who didn’t write anything were fallible, because there’s no document to back them up?

 

[Bishopite]

[apophasis;2020608]These DO inherit the kingdom according to the GRACE of God in Christ Jesus, having been washed, sanctified and justified in the name of Christ and in the Spirit of their God. Are you one them? Or are you trying to justify yourself?The “Ten Commandments” were an integral part of the old covenant, the Mosaic Law given to Israel at Mt. Sinai. Paul emphatically states that the Apostles are “servants of a new covenant,” not of the letter, but of the Spirit; FOR THE LETTER KILLS, but THE SPIRIT GIVES LIFE.

To say that the ten commandments are no longer part of what God commands is taking a blind eye to Scripture. We don’t live by the old “law of Torah” that is to say, practicing circumcision, dietary laws, animal sacrifices etc. but that doesn’t mean the Old Testament is null and void. To “YOU” it is but God’s commands are ALWAYS true, they are universal and abosolute truths.

Why would Paul say “the obedience of faith” What are we to obey???
John 5:3 “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.”

He goes on to call those “letters engraved on stones” the “ministry of death” and the “ministry of condemnation.” Why? Because all those commandents could ever do is condemn.

That’s NOT true. The ten commandments were and still are commandments of GRACE and of LOVE, that’s why Jesus said that the greatest commandment is to “love” one another.

**

John 5:3 “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

”
Apparently the commandments “ARE” grievous to you.

No one could keep them then and, don’t deceive yourself, buddy, you can’t keep them now. If you’re going to live by them you must live them perfectly. You can’t. Their purpose was never meant to save anyone, but as a “tutor” to lead to Christ that one might be “justified BY FAITH” (Gal. 3:24).
**

Nope. The ten commandments aren’t grievous, it would be you who would think they are grievous since you say we can’t keep them. We live in the new covenant and do you think Jesus contradicts God? No that’s why Jesus says “that we keep his commandments” We can keep them, and the only one who is fooling themself is I’m afraid you. I wouldn’t want to stand before Jesus and explain to Him why I didn’t keep His commandments. Using the we don’t have to keep the commandments any longer logic to its conclusion would mean anyone who is “saved” can commit adultery freely and still be “saved.”

Those “letters engraved on stones” had glory in their day, but they have no glory on account of the glory of the new covenant, in Christ’s cleansing blood, that surpasses it. A covenant entered into BY FAITH ALONE (2 Cor. 3:1-11).

The moral law of God is immutable, whether or not you abide by it is up to you. And faith alone is only found in James 2:24; a salvific negative…that we are NOT saved by faith alone.

 

[Milliardo]

Paul said in 1 Cor that he came to preach the gospel and not to baptize. Now if baptism is part of the gospel then Paul would never have made this statement.
1 Cor 1:17
7 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.
NASU

I think that you forgot elsewhere that Paul baptized people; his point here is that his particular mission to the Corinthians is not to baptize, but to preach to them.

 

[Robert902]

guanophore:
Guanophore,
So are you saying that baptism is required to receive God’s gift of salvation? I know it is for Catholics, but I’m talking about the Biblical definition of salvation. “For you are saved by grace through faith, not of works (like baptism) lest any man boast.” “Most assuredly I say to you he who believes in Me has eternal life.” John 6:47 Jesus didn’t tell Nicodemus or the thief on the cross that they needed to baptised to be saved, did He?
Don’t get me wrong, every Christian needs to be baptised as an act of obedience, but more importantly it’s signifies and acknowledges the transistion we experience when we are born again. Baptism isn’t on God’s checklist of things we need to do if we want to accept His gift of salvation.
God chose us before the foundation of the world. Eph 1:4-5 Even before we were baptised.

God Bless
Robert

---

1 Thess 5:21-22 “test all things”.​

 

[dessert]

How do you that the teaching magesterium is guided by the Holy Spirit?

Aren’t they just men? Yes.

What makes them fallible if they are sinfull men?

When Jesus started to called His disciples, apostles He said He said He was sending them out and if anyone recieves them they recieve Him because he sent them as teh Father as sent me.And if anyone rejects them they reject Him.

There is that word recieve again ! Nnot just into the mind but into the heart.

19; How is Sacred Scripture to be read?
Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted with the help of the Holy Spirit and under the guidance of the Magisterium of the Church according to three criteria; (1) it must be read with attention to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture; (2) it must be read within the living Tradition of the Church; (3) it must be read with attention to the analogy of faith, that is, the inner harmony which exists among the truths of the faith themselves.

17; What is the relationship between Scripture . Tradition and the Magisterium?
Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium are so closely united with each other that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.
Compendium of the Catholic Church

Conclusion :hypno: I hope and

11;"Finally, brothers, rejoice. Mend your ways, encourage one another, agree with one another, live in peace, and the God of love and peace will be with you. 12; Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the holy ones greet you. 13; The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with all of you. 2 Cori.13;11-13 :grouphug:

Dessert

 

[guanophore]

Guanophore,
So are you saying that baptism is required to receive God’s gift of salvation? I know it is for Catholics, but I’m talking about the Biblical definition of salvation. “For you are saved by grace through faith, not of works (like baptism) lest any man boast.” “Most assuredly I say to you he who believes in Me has eternal life.” John 6:47 Jesus didn’t tell Nicodemus or the thief on the cross that they needed to baptised to be saved, did He?
Don’t get me wrong, every Christian needs to be baptised as an act of obedience, but more importantly it’s signifies and acknowledges the transistion we experience when we are born again. Baptism isn’t on God’s checklist of things we need to do if we want to accept His gift of salvation.
God chose us before the foundation of the world. Eph 1:4-5 Even before we were baptised.

God Bless
Robert

---

1 Thess 5:21-22 “test all things”.​

You asked me a question, then you answered it yourself! Here are some Catholic answers to your question:

catholic.com/library/Necessity_of_Baptism.asp

catholic.com/library/Baptismal_Grace.asp

The biblical definition of salvation is 100% consistent with the teaching of the Catholic church, and vice versa. If it appears otherwise, then certain verses are being taken out of context or are being discarded. When the teaching of salvation is taken as a whole, there are no discrepancies.

 

[guanophore]

Conclusion :hypno: I hope and

11;"Finally, brothers, rejoice. Mend your ways, encourage one another, agree with one another, live in peace, and the God of love and peace will be with you. 12; Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the holy ones greet you. 13; The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with all of you. 2 Cori.13;11-13 :grouphug:

Dessert

From your mouth, to God’s ear dessert! however, in this case, it may take longer than either of our lifetimes. There will not be agreement in this thread because the Sola Scriptura and Sola Fida folks reject two of your three sources. It is like they are driving one of those cool three wheeled all terrain vehicles, but it is missing two wheels. It will be very hard to get anywhere!

 

[apophasis]

dessert:

Thank you for your response.I neede to get to sleep and now I need to gotto work again.
I agrree with John 3;16 but if you read all of John 3 but read on 22; After these things, Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there He remained with them and baptized. read 25 and 26 He (disciples)is baptizing and all are coming to Him!!

Actually, I referenced the whole Jn. 3:14-18 passage where Jesus compares the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness to Himself and the cross He would eventually bear for the sins of the world. Those who looked up, by faith in God’s Word, to the bronze serpent after being bitten by serpents, escaped the divine judgment of death that was upon them (see Num. 21).

In like manner, those who have been bitten by sin (all of Adam’s race), according to the Word of God, have only to look to Christ, by faith, to escape divine judgment and inherit eternal life:Jn. 3:18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already (why?), because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

Jn. 5:24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes in Him who sent Me, HAS eternal life, and DOES NOT come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.” At the end of Christ’s earthly ministry He commissioned His Apostles to baptize believers “eis to onoma tou patros kai tou huiou kai tou hagiou pneumatos” (INTO the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit). This baptism of Matt. 28:19 was not the same baptism performed by Christ’s disciples in Jn. 3:22. He had not yet gone to the cross. The baptism Christ commanded His Apostles to perform in Matt. 28:19 could not be done until AFTER His death, burial and bodily resurrection. It is a baptism based on one’s personal belief in His redemptive work on the cross.

So what is your profession of faith?

That when the kindness of God my Savior and His love for mankind appeared, he saved me, not on the basis of works which I have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon me richly through Jesus Christ my Savior, that being justified by His grace I might be made an heir according to the hope of eternal life" (Titus 3:4-7).And based on this profession of salvation faith I was publicly baptized.

Dessert, I won’t be posting on this thead anymore. Too much hostility. You may PM me if you wish.

Blessings,

 

[dessert]

The thief on the cross was in the prescence of the spotless sinless blood of our Savior Jesus Christ being washed from His body onto the ground for the salvaton of all. Ah I think that covers him and because of his repentance.

Nicodemus maybe had been baptized, not sure .

Nicodemus would have known God’s promise in EZEkiel 36; 25-26
Here was the fullfilllment of that promise standing before him, offering all that the prophet had foretold.
Dessert

 

[dessert]

Actually, I referenced the whole Jn. 3:14-18 passage where Jesus compares the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness to Himself and the cross He would eventually bear for the sins of the world. Those who looked up, by faith in God’s Word, to the bronze serpent after being bitten by serpents, escaped the divine judgment of death that was upon them (see Num. 21).

In like manner, those who have been bitten by sin (all of Adam’s race), according to the Word of God, have only to look to Christ, by faith, to escape divine judgment and inherit eternal life:Jn. 3:18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already (why?), because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

Jn. 5:24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes in Him who sent Me, HAS eternal life, and DOES NOT come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.” At the end of Christ’s earthly ministry He commissioned His Apostles to baptize believers “eis to onoma tou patros kai tou huiou kai tou hagiou pneumatos” (INTO the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit). This baptism of Matt. 28:19 was not the same baptism performed by Christ’s disciples in Jn. 3:22. He had not yet gone to the cross. The baptism Christ commanded His Apostles to perform in Matt. 28:19 could not be done until AFTER His death, burial and bodily resurrection. It is a baptism based on one’s personal belief in His redemptive work on the cross.That when the kindness of God my Savior and His love for mankind appeared, he saved me, not on the basis of works which I have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon me richly through Jesus Christ my Savior, that being justified by His grace I might be made an heir according to the hope of eternal life" (Titus 3:4-7).And based on this profession of salvation faith I was publicly baptized.

Dessert, I won’t be posting on this thead anymore. Too much hostility. You may PM me if you wish.

Blessings,

Oh of course just when things get interesting!
You chicken out.

I believe that the thief on the cross had the baptism of disire and there is a fact about blood ; Blood contains red cells and white which are called the plasma and water and of course other stuff I don’t know about. The water was spewed out from the Lord’s side and this could be represented of the Spirit as I read in a narrative.

We don’t all have as a thick skin as you might think.
Dessert

 

[dessert]

262; Is it possible to be saved without Baptism?
page79 of the Compendium of the Catholic Church it has to do with (Baptism of Blood), but go find it yourself!
We also are tired of repeating ourselves. But I thank you for your profession and God Bless you too. Dessert

 

[dcdurel]

When do we first receive the grace that saves us. Is it the moment we believe? There is no verse saying we receive the grace that saves us the MOMENT we believe. St. Paul ofter leaves out intermediate steps when talking about salvation and this is when Protestants try to say we first receive the grace of salvation the moment we believe.
St. Paul was not saved from his sins the moment he first believed, but when he was baptised. See Acts 22
Jesus said to listen to His Church, not to Luther.
Thus, the apostles handed down the teaching that we first receive the grace of salvation the moment we are baptized by means of the Holy Spirit. Scripture is in perfect agreement.
I will quote these scriptures.
Protestants, as usual, will ignore them.
Protestants, as usual, will say we receive the grace of salvation the moment we believe, thus making the scriptures I quoted wrong.
Or they will jump through hoops to try to interpret them in a manner that justifies the teachings of Luther that we are saved the “moment we first believe”, a teachings found no where in the bible, instead of being objective and taking the plain meaning.
Thus, they have no qualms about contradicting the Holy Word of God, so as to preserved their faith in the teachings of Luther and Calvin.

Again, their faith is in the teachings of Luther and Calvin. They don’t believe Jesus when he said to “listen to the Church”

They always go to what Luther and Calvin taught.
Their faith is in Luther and Calvin.
Did Jesus say to listen to Luther and Calvin, or to His Church?

 

[dcdurel]

When are we first saved Jesus merited the grace of salvation for us by His death and resurrection. But how do we first received this grace of salvation? When are we first saved from our sins?

The constant teaching of the apostles that has been handed down in 2000 years of Christianity has always been that we first receive the grace of salvation when we are baptized.

Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)
Since the only time we are born again of water and the Spirit is when we are baptized, it follows that after Jesus established His Church, unless we are baptized we cannot enter into the kingdom of God. We cannot enter the heaven because we have not been saved from our sins.

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)
The clear words of Jesus say that we must believe and be baptized. Baptism is not optional. He did not say believe OR be baptized.

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, (1 Peter 3:21)
** “Baptism now saves you”** the bible says. The bible can’t lie. It gets it’s power to save us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

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 2:38)
He does not say “Repent or be baptized” but “Repent and be baptized” Both are necessary for the remission of sins. We also receive the Holy Ghost at baptism. “…and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

“he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,” (Titus 3:5)
We are both washed of regeneration (regenerate means to be made new, to be born again) and renewed of the Holy Ghost only at baptism. We are saved by grace only at baptism. Here Paul uses the word “saved” as he always does, except for two times, to refer to the beginning of salvation when we are first saved from our sins, not final salvation.

“that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the **washing of water **with the word,” (Ephesians 5:26)
When the members of the church are saved, they are sanctified and cleansed of their sins. Paul says this occurs by the “washing of water.” Washing of the water only occurs at baptism. We are sanctified, (receive sanctifying grace) and so saved from our sins at baptism.