Posted on 04/24/2015 3:59:10 PM PDT by RnMomof7
I was listening to a sermon by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones not long ago in which he pointed out that assurance is one of the most prominent subjects in the New Testament. Virtually every New Testament epistle was written to address some doubt, answer some question, settle some uncertainty—all of them aimed at stimulating or reinforcing the assurance of believers. Scripture encourages us to have assurance. It is not inherently brash or presumptuous to be confident in your faith.
Shortly after reading that comment by Lloyd-Jones, while doing some research on a totally different theme, I had occasion to review The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Trent was the Roman Catholic Council that was convened in the mid-1500s in order to hammer out an official response from the Roman Catholic Church to the Protestant Reformation.
And let’s be candid: the Protestant Reformation had embarrassed the whole Roman Catholic hierarchy in a major way, because in addition to the many doctrinal errors and patently unbiblical and extrabiblical teachings the Reformers challenged, they also shone the bright light of biblical truth on centuries of exploitation of Papal power, gross corruption of the priesthood, spiritual abuse for material profit (including the sale of indulgences and the sale of church offices and political favors for money). Underneath all of this was the most shocking kind of moral rot that went right to the top in the Papal hierarchy. The Roman Catholic Church was totally corrupt.
The council of Trent cleaned up or papered over some of the more obvious exhibitions of rank clerical debauchery. At the very least we could say that Trent somewhat subdued the unbridled corruption of the medieval priesthood, after generations of abuse and corruption that were the hallmark of the priesthood right across Europe.
One other thing that the Council of Trent accomplished was this: They gave clear definition to certain Catholic doctrines that had always been rather hazy and abstruse—such as the doctrine of justification.
But fundamentally, the Council of Trent was a backlash against Protestant teaching.
The popes and bishops of the 16th century were not at all eager to convene a council to discuss the areas of church life and doctrine that needed Reform. It took years to get the council going. Meetings stretched out over about thirty years’ time. The bishops convened in fits and starts, working more or less halfheartedly for the first couple of decades. Only in the council’s final stages did they show any enthusiasm for the work. By then, they were so eager to antagonize the Protestants and their doctrines that they cranked out document after document pronouncing anathemas on the Reformers.
And in the process (mainly, I think, because they were more interested in countering the Protestants than they were in clarifying biblical truth on the issues they dealt with), they got major points of doctrine wrong in every set of decrees they issued.
For example, in their decree on the doctrine of justification (Council of Trent, Sixth session, chapter 9), they said this: “It is not to be said, that sins are forgiven, or have been forgiven, to any one who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins.” In other words, while we can know with certainty that God does forgive sins, no individual can say with any settled certainty—based on faith alone—”My sins are forgiven.” Even the priest’s declaration of absolution is only good until the next time you sin.
The Council of Trent went on to draw this conclusion: “No one can know with a certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God.”
That’s why no faithful Roman Catholic can ever really be sure of his or her salvation, even though they have thousands of priests in thousands of confessionals every day telling people that the sins they confess to the priests are forgiven. Those priests are giving people a deadly false assurance, and even Rome’s official doctrine acknowledges that.
But Scripture says this (1 John 5:13): “You may know that you have eternal life.” “The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God” (Romans 8:15). “Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar” (1 John 5:10). We’re supposed to “be . . . diligent to make [our] calling and election sure” (2 Peter 1:10). Far from saying what the Roman Catholic Church says, that it’s sinful—even damnably evil—to be certain that our sins are forgiven and we have received the grace of God—Scripture says, “do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward” (Hebrews 10:35).
Scripture everywhere commends and encourages assurance. Nowhere are we taught to live in a state of perpetual doubt about our personal standing before God. Never does the Bible suggest that we should rely on the false promises of a mere man in a confessional booth who can never offer anything more than a kind of temporary absolution; a spiritual bait-and-switch offer that can never usher anyone into the true rest that is the birthright of those whose faith is authentic.
Ping
Great post...
Hoss
Why people miss that assurance is beyond me.
I don't know why they miss it either. My guess, for those in works based religions, is that it doesn't fit their narrative. For many, they can not give up the pride they feel, when they think they live a good enough life, to work their way to Heaven. For those trusting in their works, there isn't much assurance, because they never know if they have been good enough to make it.
Our assurance is not based on our faith, but the trustworthiness of God and His promises.
We don’t have faith in our faith. We have faith in our God.
A subtle but important distinction.
Therefore we can know we are secure and be assured of our salvation, not because we believe it to be true, but because God, who is faithful, said so and we trust Him.
I think people miss that assurance because they simply MUST be able to DO SOMETHING toward their salvation. Why though? For bragging rights? Because they don’t really believe that God has done everything necessary? Do they think He may have forgotten something, some part that THEY need to show Him?
Interesting, isn’t it,that those who are most insecure in thier salvation and lack assurance demand that everyone else does as well.
They almost demand that everyone struggle with doubt as they do. It eats at them that they lack assurance, so they don’t want anyone else to have it either.
I think that they think somehow, if they can make everyone else have doubt, then they feel like the might make it themselves after all. Someone who has assurance is a threat to them because the know they don’t have it and they realize that they’re missing something.
That is what I thought when I was a catholic, but I have gone on to bigger and better things. Now, I have assurance, through simple faith in Christ. I think you are right. People involved in works based religions, tend to think they must DO SOMETHING toward their salvation, when there isn't one single solitary thing they can do toward it. It's a beautiful thing. More people should try it, they will like it. 🇵🇭😀😄😃😎😇😂😅
When I read for the first time the following passage from the Bible, I immediately KNEW salvation was an assurance Christ wanted me to have:
From that day forward, I became a genuine, born again Christian and my life has never been the same. For those who declare such assurance is the "sin of presumption", I say to NOT believe what Jesus said is the REAL sin.
From what I can tell Catholics are deep into "herd mentality" thinking.
Neither Jesus nor Paul were into herd mentality.
Salvation is for the individual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.