Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
Cherry picking verses doesn’t cut it, snookums.
We are not saved by Christ and anything.
The only thing that obtains forgiveness is the shedding of blood. Once sins are forgiven, there’s no need to work to earn forgiveness. For that matter, it’s not forgiveness if it has to be worked for.
Scripture could not be plainer that salvation is through CHRIST. It is through faith in Him, not working our way into His favor.
If works could do it, Christ wasn’t necessary. It ceases to be a gift when it’s earned.
Sadly, it’s going to be too late when you figure that one out.
There may be the TESTIMONY of the church but not the witness of it because nobody was there to witness everything Mary ever did.
And even is someone claimed it, 2,000 year old hearsay is still hearsay.
Actually it does but it seems you didn’t grasp what “until” means.
What two phrases does it connect in the verse?
Of course he is making it. There is no shortage of passages where works of the law are said to be not salvific and next to it works of faith and love are urged. The first paragraph of Titus 3 is a good example, or any ending of a Pauline letter where having argued against circumcision he goes on to urge good works.
Rather, justification is by imputed righteousness — Christ works being the effective cause — procured through a kind of God-given faith that will bring forth fruit unto practical holiness.
Righteousness is real , not "imputed". "Imputed" is an Old Testament construct. A Chjristian man is a "new creature" (Galatians 6:15), not an old creature in camouflage.
if believers are accounted to have "truly merited eternal life" by those “very works which have been done in God,” then it is a wage
Yes, if a motivation is salvation, or fear of punishment, then it is no longer work of love. Salvific work imitates Christ; He worked because He loved. Romans 11 and Romans 4 that you go on to cite make the disctintions between grace and any works, not between faith and works, and are wholly Catholic doctrine of Grace Alone.
while Rm. 7:12 and Gal. 3:21 are obviously not referenced as contrasting works versus grace but they are used to argue that if there was a way to merit eternal life by works then it would have been by the law, in which one has faith that God will justify him on account of his works-righteousness
No, it is still not by law. Sainthood by definition is heroic virtue: something done out of pure love without conscious regard of one's salvation. One does not, for example, get saved by doing charity work now and then, but by becoming internally out of habit (as a "new creature") a charitable person. Sorry if I neglected to make it clear earlier.
Eph. 2:9,10 ... do not mention works of the law
No, but it only mentions works negatively in v.9 to contrast it with grace.
The next paragraph was part of the argument and gave two examples.
and I adressed them, or did I misunderstand which ones?
Thus you must attempt to restrict “works of righteousness” “not of works,” “not according to our works,” and “to him that worketh not,” to only applying to a certain kind of works, contrasting that with “works of faith,” while the Biblical contrast is broadly between works of any kind versus faith
But that "the Biblical contrast is broadly between works of any kind versus faith" is still to be proven. Please explain where do you see that. I did point out how the context always qualifies the non-salvific works.
Christ did not got the cross simply because He is loving
Yes, He did. God is love. That is all God does: He loves.
the classic Protestant doctrine of sola fide preaches that the kind of faith that is salvific is one that shows forth things which accompany salvation, "For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." (Romans 2:13) Not because they merit it, but because that is the character of saving faith
Very well, but that then denies Faith Alone. It has to be faith whose character it is to do good works, -- faith + works.
You left out [2 Tim 1:9], “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace..."
That is another contrast between works and grace. It is not a contrast between works and faith. It makes my point.
Annalex: So no, I do not see a prooftext of faith and good works being "either one or the other".
daniel1212 : As concerns what the basis for justification is, that should be obvious.
I am sorry. If it were "obvious" to me I would not have asked. I still don't see any proof from scripture that faith and good works are mutually exclusive as "the basis for justification". I, in fact, can supply a few direct scripture passages that say, if taken at face value that good works ALONE are the basis for justification (Matthew 25:31-46, primarily, but there are several passages to that effect.)
Annalex:Each passage you cite affirms the Catholic teaching: The sovereign purpose of God is love for us; works of the law (or works of justice) do not have a salvific merit; works of faith or good works done in the spirit of love are a necessary part of our response to grace.
daniel1212 : To which you should have said, “and which merit eternal life.”
... and which merit eternal life. "Possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat...". Note that causative "for".
INDEED.
Though I’m sure they’d likely say something akin to
. . . instead of
THE SHADOW KNOWS
it would be
THE WHITE HANKYS KNEW!
And by good works. It is therefore not only confessional. confession of faith is merely a start. Consider 2 Peter 1:2-10.
But what if the person is mute, and immobilized, and all he/she can do is think?
Well, the Good Thief was immobilized, literally. He still defended the innocent and did penance for his sins. As a thought experiment, I can grant you that good work may be a bare internal prayer for the good of a neighbor, for any other expression of virtue is physically impossible. It is still heroic virtue -- works.
what James does not say is that such works of faith merit eternal life
He said "justified". That means eternal life. Here is the passage:
[21] Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? [22] Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? [23] And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. [24] Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only?Of course St. James is not saying that Abraham was justified by merely offering up Isaac, i.e. by works alone; it is by works cooperating with faith that he was justified.
Souls are not saved on the basis of their own holiness, but faith which is imputed for righteousness
No, not "imputed". That perhaps is the root of Protestant error. A holy man is a new creature, he truly is. Of course that holiness is of Christ, -- partaking of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) but souls are saved solely on the basis of holiness. See again Matthew 25:31-46.
poorer spirituality
I don't know how you compare these things, but what I witness in Protestantism is not spirituality but elevated emotionalism.
a modern day Berean would likely not become an Roman Catholic
Most Catholic converts are exactly converts along the Berean model: they study the scripture and they discover that on all the Catholic distinctives it is the Catholics who take the Bible on face value and Protestants need to build complex sophistry to get from "not by faith alone" to "by faith alone" or from "this is my body" to "this symbolically represents my body".
Rome's assertion that Catholicism manifests a greater degree of grace, but based on what research i have, converts to evangelical churches most typically usually do not primarily site doctrinal issues, but relational, with 90% of former Roman Catholics saying it was a spiritual search for a more direct, personal experience with God
Both are true. Catholicism is means of uncreated grace. This is not something people can easily relate to. Catholic service is impersonal and unemotional. A good priest, for example, is one who serves as if no congregation was present at all. He, in fact, would do well to have his back to them. If one wants an emotional involvement, especially if "personal" means a separation from the Communion of Saints, he is not ready for the Church, and very many aren't.
It is not me who is rejecting the Gospel since I accept it with all my heart. What I reject is your religion's assertion that only it can determine what Scripture truly means because, when they do not interpret God's word correctly, they elevate man's doctrine over God's truth. I have also not turned down God's gift of eternal life that he grants by grace through faith, because I have received it by faith.
Those who insist that they can somehow "supplement" the gift by adding their own good deeds to it completely change it from a gift into debt that they then insist God owes them for their good deeds. In other words, they do not accept the gift but ignore it in favor of earning it themselves. This, of course, is impossible, so they have, by this corruption of the way in which God has granted us redemption through Christ, rejected the gift and stand condemned by their own doing. They should greatly fear the wrath of God on those who toss his gift back in his face.
The amazing grace of God never stops calling us and only death seals our fate. Those who reject the gift and die in unbelief are eternally condemned but as long as they have breath, there is still a chance. Don't die rejecting the gift!
It seems your responses are getting more shrill with each post. If you are upset, maybe you need to take a break.
Would you please point me to any post that I or any other person has posted that says once-saved-always-saved-works-don't-matter, because I would have never said that. Of course works matter, just not in the way you fantasize they do. They will never save you. Only faith in Jesus Christ as Savior brings eternal life in heaven. Our works result from a heart that is changed by that very faith and the new nature that is born within us compels us to do works that are pleasing to God. It is pure folly to think that our meager efforts have any part in the righteousness God has imparted to us in Christ Jesus - folly, fantasy and fatal, forever!
It has been said....”you don’t listen and respond to what’s said in a way that indicates you actually understand the point at issue..... Instead you hear something, categorize it according to the template you have before you, and choose whichever talking point most closely approximates an item on the menu of your template. It is like talking not to a man but to a machine.
Now instead of simply a comment you are using this as a means of doing just that...yet again.
The Psalm says, "I humbled myself and the Lord saved me". As St. Symeon the New Theologian put it "I neither fasted or slept on bare ground or kept vigils but ... I did no more than believe and the Lord accepted me" (On Faith -- I don't have an online reference). Humility is good, the way Protestant communities of faith practice it is infected with the Total Depravity nonsense (I know, you don't subscribe), ostentatious and often grotesque. But, yes, the idea is totally biblical. Christ humbled Himself.
what you not find is souls being treated as if they were Christians due to infant baptism and perfunctory professions, which prevail in institutionalized religion of any camp
You are a Christian, moreover, born again Christian, and once-saved Christian thanks to infant (or any other) baptism. You are saved again thanks to a confession no matter how perfunctory. That is because, no matter where you put "works" in the plan of salvation, the Holy Mysteries of Baptism, Confession, Eucharist are not our works. It is God Who works, "according to his own purpose and grace". I know you don't have it, but you should not brag of not having it.
the typical Catholic is politically and morally less conservative and more liberal.
It si neither here or there, even though it is in a way true. I simply said that we all agree as a practical matter on what is right and what is wrong. As to conservatism, Catholicism does not necessarily match American Conservatism shaped after all by mostly Evangelical Protestants. Also, it is helpful to distinguish "cultural Catholics" to are Catholic because they are Italian or something, and committed, Rosary-praying, in-church-every-chance-they-get Catholics. Then tend to be overwhelmingly conservative and in the genuine sense of the word.
Total depravity of man and limited atonement are not uniformly held;
Thank God, no. But whty do you think that theological idiocy developed on the Protestant soil in the first place?
if there is any group that between the two at issue that is “very much about practice” it more evangelicals
Yeah. Perhaps, that is compensation for bad theology. I wondered the same thing, even on this thread. On the other hand, Catholic contribution is often overlooked because it comes in form of schools, universities, hospitals, foreign aid, -- all things done institutionally and not through local, visible effort.
the Inquisitions
I am a big fan, so don't knock them. One thing you probalby agree wrong with Protestantism is no way to discipline outright heresy. Nothing would prevent Protestants to develop modern and enlightened ways to deal with its own bad apples and they are perfectly free from any medieval baggage the Holy Inquisition might have.
alleviate poor souls in her mythical purgatory
An indulgence, by the way, is a good example of practicing heroic virtue that we spoke about earlier. Didn't you just get done telling me that works done to advance one's own salvation are like working for wage? Well, here's one work one can do that is demonstrably not wage. Further, the Prutgatory is wholly biblical, check 1 Cor 3:8-15. It surely is more biblical than Faith Alone.
Holding the church to be a material means of salvation is one thing; holding that taking part in the Lord's supper is necessary to have life in you, which many RC's erroneously suppose Jn. 6:53 means, is another
That is what "If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh ... He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day", -- means. Again, we read what is written, Protestants build up long sophistries to run away from clear scripture. We can have a separate discussion on the words of Institution in the light of John 6, but for a brief note on that, please do not think that because "the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life" it means that the "food indeed" became all spiritual food toward the end of the chapter. The Eucharist is not something from which the stomach profits, -- that is what it says. That is what "spiritual" means, one that feeds the soul.
Sorry for the typos -- I got to run off to work.
I would not dare to take a necklace off you.
It would be impossible anyway.
I don’t wear em.
“Frozen Chosen.” (no pics, sorry)
Would appreciate some prayer for pain & speedy healing.
Just now, was a bit dumber than usual & didn’t stop table saw B4 reaching 2 remove scrap piece . . . worse . . . with glove on.
Buggered pad if rt thumb about 1/4” diam.
Tore off about rt 1/8th” of nail and about 1 1/4th inch down finger, strip of skin 1/8th—3/8ths wide.
Washed. Salt on finger as bleeding was quite persistent.
Wrapped in soft paper towel and paper tape.
Fool so feelish. Had just thought 15 min earlier needed to take gloves off on the saw.
Thx in advance for your prayers.
Prayers here, FRiend and Bro.
How are you now?
He had more faith in his money.
Has the bleeding stopped or should you get stitches?
I hope Quix is alright and we hear from him soon. Maybe he went to get stitches.
Prayers offered for the healing of your hand. It started healing the second after you hurt it. Take care of it. - Granny used to say, “No matter what happens, from the cradle to the hearse, nothing is so bad, that it couldn’t have been worse.” - The hard part about cutting your hand with a glove on is that you’re left to wonder until you nervously remove the glove. Get well soon!
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.