Posted on 05/23/2008 8:39:53 AM PDT by annalex
What is this "objectively" term being thrown around with respect to God? God made morality, it is subject to Him. Justification is subject to God, our souls are subject to God, the terms of our unrighteousness are subject to God. There is nothing about our justification that is objective with respect to God.
If you believe that God is subject to a greater morality, then show me the true God who is not and I will believe in Him.
Sorry about the tangent.
If you’re going to teach, you should couch your arguments in terms your students can understand.
For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.
The author (all Catholics?) argues that justification and sanctification are one and the same, but Paul here separates the foundation of Christ which leads to salvation and our works built on the foundation which leads to heavenly reward. I was hoping this passage would be addressed, but it doesn't seem to be in the article. Did I miss it?
guilt and innocence, righteousness and unrighteousness, are exactly the kind of objectively real properties that Catholics say they are.
No one is arguing for morality outside of God here.
I am not Akin, but I’d be happy to help. What is it that is diffucult for you to understand?
The author (all Catholics?) argues that justification and sanctification are one and the same, but Paul here separates the foundation of Christ which leads to salvation and our works built on the foundation which leads to heavenly reward
I don't see a separation of salvation and justification in 1 Cor 3:11-15. St. Paul sees the life of an elect as a process of building upon the foundation of Christ toward greater righteousness, which then culminates in salvation.
People rarely leave a church for the music. There are deeper issues. Because of all the personalities ANY church is like herding cats.
People rarely leave a church for the music. There are deeper issues. Because of all the personalities ANY church is like herding cats.
But when Paul talks about the one who built poorly and it is burned up in the Day, that person is still saved. Doesn't that mean there is separation?
Yes, they do. The mother of a friend left her Methodist church when a new director of music arrived and introduced contemporary hymns. Did other reasons exist for leaving? Perhaps but without the ability to see into the heart, the question remains unanswered.
Fortunately, I’m not a theologian and unable to pose a question.
No — why?
He build poorly but divine love purifies him, and he is saved in the end.
Doesn't that statement separate sanctification and justification right there?
No — which are the parts? I see it as a single process.
The Early Church Fathers on Justification - Catholic/Orthodox Caucus
JUSTIFICATION IN CATHOLIC TEACHING [Open]
Justification: declarative or transformative?
The Early Church Fathers on Justification - Catholic/Orthodox Caucus
Questions on Justification (five questions regarding justification and the Bible)
Thank you.
I know in my Methodist church if the bigwigs didn’t like the pastor, he was gone, that doesn’t happen in the Catholic Church.
And in the independents if they don’t like the pastor the church breaks up and splinters again.
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.