Replies

Where does Matthew 25 talk about unbelievers?

That is a good point, -- faith is not mentioned directly in the passage. But indirectly -- the goats address Christ as "Lord" and are surprised to learn that they rejected Christ by rejecting the suffering and the poor. Sounds like the goats thought of themselves as believers.

The preceding discourse is the parable of the talents where a man is condemned to "exterior darkness". If talents represent faith, as I am sure the Protestants would agree, then here we have someone who had in initial deposit of faith but did not work on increasing it, and is sent to hell.

Which reminds me once more: Luther never read the gospels.

That is a good point, -- faith is not mentioned directly in the passage. But indirectly -- the goats address Christ as "Lord" and are surprised to learn that they rejected Christ by rejecting the suffering and the poor. Sounds like the goats thought of themselves as believers.

Very good! Much like the other Matthew 25 parables. Each man was given money. Each virgin was expected to be ready. Some were, some used their gifts, some did what God required them to do. And others did not. But the sum total of people in each of these cases were all considered in the same class, initially. Matches well with Matthew 7:21 (Lord, Lord...). Of course, we know from other Scriptures that it is not works alone, but faith AND works. Thus, we understand, as you point out, that faith is indirectly involved and presumed.

Which reminds me once more: Luther never read the gospels

Yea, he was worse than Marcion. Luther would have us believe that Romans and Galatians is the "Gospel".

Regards

Where does Matthew 25 talk about unbelievers? That is a good point, -- faith is not mentioned directly in the passage. But indirectly -- the goats address Christ as "Lord" and are surprised to learn that they rejected Christ by rejecting the suffering and the poor. Sounds like the goats thought of themselves as believers.

Yes, and it is a point that those who think they know Christ but have not been born again,(Jn.3:3) should heed very carefully.

The preceding discourse is the parable of the talents where a man is condemned to "exterior darkness". If talents represent faith, as I am sure the Protestants would agree, then here we have someone who had in initial deposit of faith but did not work on increasing it, and is sent to hell.

Regarding Matthew 25:14-30, David Cloud writes,

1. The man concept of the Lord shows that he is a lost man. He considered the Lord 'an hard man'....The fact that this man is called a servant does not necessarily mean that he was saved. The Jews are called the Lord's servants, but they were not all saved (Isa.43:10)(Way of Life Encyclopeida of the Bible and Christiantiy, p.203)

Which reminds me once more: Luther never read the gospels.

And it shows me that you have never read the Pauline Epistles.

For by grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast (Eph.2:8-9)

But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness (Rom.4:5)

Now, those scriptures are very clear, what part about 'not of works' do you not understand?