I had not anticipated that we might both be writing a book on this subject, succinctness does not seem to apply to either of us. No insult intended.
I do not understand how a priest can be in the person of Christ? I understand that on Pentecost the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit. Unless I have misinterpreted scripture they were empowered to do miracles, which was how they authenticated their power. Today I do not see any evidence of such powers.
I believe that creation is the evidence of God so that no man has an excuse.
There is no need to expand on how confession is good for the soul. We are taught to confess our sins to each other and if I have sinned against you I must ask for your forgiveness. I do not refer to myself as a protestant because I do not protest the Catholic Church. I do protest any theology that does not condemn abortion that does not support traditional marriage between a man and a woman that teaches that Jesus is not God incarnate, that teaches that Jesus did not perform miracles, and that teaches that the Apostles did not perform miracles, but the Catholic Church teaches none of these heretical doctrines.
You quoted Mat 5:22, I note that the language is identical to the King James Version, which is my translation of choice. Are you quoting from it or a Catholic translation?
I’ll give you my take on it. Since I am not convinced that Purgatory exists, it is not an option. Obviously we have to deal with the word “judgment”. It might refer to the final judgment? I have come to my own personal understanding of how the final judgment works. Since I believe that Christians will not be judged on their works, but will be justified by their continued faith in Christ who has the power to save us and cleans us of all sins and therefore we will not be condemned to Hell, the final judgment is for those who are not covered by the Blood of Christ and who will have to stand before Him and He will then separate the goats from the sheep. I’m not sure if my theology is fundamentalism. I do not believe the world is 5000 years old, and I do believe that there will be nations in Heaven who walk in the light of the Church. Since the church is the body of believers, the nations are not people in the church.
Revelation 21:
4And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
8But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
22And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.
23And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.
24And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Psalm 9:5 5Thou hast rebuked the “heathen” [NIV nations], thou hast destroyed the wicked, thou hast put out their name for ever and ever. 7 The LORD reigns forever; he has established his throne for judgment. 10 Those who know your name will trust in you, for you, LORD, have never forsaken those who seek you. 17 The wicked return to the grave, all the nations that forget God.
But the believer will not stand before Christ in judgment: 19Arise, O LORD; let not man prevail: let the heathen be judged in thy sight.
I am sure we agree that Christ expanded the meaning of the law, but I am not sure if we concur on the reason. I understand the plausibility of your take on the expansion of the law. What is your take on this suggestion? The Sermon on the Mount established an impossible task for man to achieve. There are other examples: give up everything you have and follow me, etc.
17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. To enter Heaven the entrant must be cleansed of all sin, or he must not have committed sin. I suspect we agree on this point, since Purgatory serves this purpose for a man who has sinned. How clean is clean? Matthew 5: 20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
For myself, since I cannot meet the no sin test, I have chosen to rely on the propitiatory death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I’m not sure where Paul said the law has no power to make us follow it, but I am sure that he said it has no power to save us.
Romans 8:3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man,
In theory we can save ourselves if we live a sinless life, but since this is not likely or even possible, Christ had to come to pay for our sins so that we would not face judgment. Believe and be saved, but you realize from our lengthily discussion on this topic, that statement says it all but does need to be understood. I once was under the impression that salvation by faith was just too easy a road, but I have come to realize that it is filled with challenges that I cannot meet on my own. I I suspect that for both of us, putting our theology aside, we have a struggle to grow in our faith and those who do not understand are not only foolish, but can even be comical. Especially when they pander to us as Christians. They do not have a clue.
Briefly, when I mentioned common law I was using an analogy. I assume that the Code of Justinian was different in some ways; I am not an expert in Roman law. But I do know about the law of Moses:
1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. I submit that the commandments were never meant as a means to salvation, but rather to show us the difference between our sinful nature and the holiness and purity of Almighty God. We know we are sinners because we cannot even keep the commandments, much less the expanded test that Jesus taught us. We have no excuse because like the criminal who is convicted of crime, we have a law and we know the punishment; all that remains is the judgment.
I would like to expand the passage you quoted from John for the proposition that the Holy Spirit roams the earth.
John 3 (King James Version)
1There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
A Pharisee had to come to Jesus at night because he believed in Jesus as a teacher from God, and that was not popular at the time, but he did not believe in Jesus as the Messiah. The man was not born again and so did not have eyes to see or ears to hear. He had no capacity to comprehend spiritual truths. Jesus said that a man is born of water, ie: birth, and then born of the spirit when he receives the Holy Spirit, which is when I believe a person is saved, perhaps he can reject the Holy Spirit at some later date, the unpardonable sin, but let’s not get bogged down in that discussion. Why do I equate water with birth? Because this was the dichotomy in context. The wind represents something that the man can feel but not see, just as we as believers feel what we cannot see.
I am not convinced that Jesus or the Holy Spirit still roam the world. I believe that prior to Pentecost that might have been the case, but after Pentecost the dispensation changed. If you do not agree with me it must be because of something not found in the Bible. Based upon theologians making reasoned conclusions based upon scripture or personal revelation, such a conclusion is well founded, but I don’t consider those sources authoritative. I have come to my conclusions based upon my own independent study of scripture, religious history, and by conversing with other Christians like you, but I only believe what I can verify in scripture. There is not much to be gained by discussing God with an atheist because they have only one rational, God doesn’t exist because I cannot see him, which is the point of the Nicodemus story.
You said: The Spirit is given not for personal gain, but for the good of the Church, the Body of Christ. I agree it is given for the good of the Body of Believers, but I would add for the good of the world, so that they may come to know Jesus. The Nicodemus passage seems to suggest that the Spirit is essential for the individual to be born again and to be saved?
I do not concern myself about matters of religious practice. If you believe that Christ is in the Eucharist, who am I to say you are wrong? If I were to accept subsequent church fathers as authoritative sources, I would most likely believe as you do. But I do not understand how this example shows me how one puts the Bible over and above apostolic teachings? Are there apostolic teachings that are not in the Bible?
Ok, I understand you to say that there are no new revelations, but that we can develop new understandings from existing scripture? If I understood you correctly than I do not understand the Papacy.
I think we both believe in Christ as fully man and fully God. I don’t know how else to phrase it. I asked if you knew of any difference between Catholic and fundamental theology on the subject. I thought you suggested that there is some difference?
You have been very kind. God Bless
Street_Lawyer
Good day. I hope all is well with you.
I will try to focus on only a couple of points. If you want to cover something that I didn't mention, feel free to bring it up.
"Since I believe that Christians will not be judged on their works, but will be justified by their continued faith in Christ who has the power to save us and cleans us of all sins and therefore we will not be condemned to Hell, the final judgment is for those who are not covered by the Blood of Christ and who will have to stand before Him and He will then separate the goats from the sheep."
Interesting that you use "goats and sheep", refering to Matt 25. Where I differ on you is emphasis on "I believe that Christians will not be judged on their OWN works..." You mention that we are saved by faith, but then, you discuss the separation of the goats from the sheep - naturally, this MUST include, then, works being done. The context of Matt 25 demands that we are to be judged on how we treat others. Thus, I sense a bit of a contradiction. Now, I would like to suggest that we add the word "own" to your quote that I cite above. We will not be saved by our own works. If you read my post on the incarnation, I hope I made it clear that Catholics believe that we are incorporated with the God/Man when we act "in" Christ. Thus, a good work can rightfully be called God's action as well as ours. We are integrated with Christ because of the Incarnation. Only while integrated as such can ANY works have merit. Thus, our OWN works are pointless.
The best Scriptural verse that comes to mind to explain this cooperation/integration is "work out your salvation with fear and trembling. For God IS THE ONE WHO, FOR HIS GOOD PURPOSES, WORKS IN YOU BOTH TO DESIRE AND TO WORK" (Phil 2:12-13). The smaller letters show WE have a responsibility to help achieve our salvation, while the cap letters show that God is working within us the desire and ability to do so. We cannot do anything of merit without Christ and the Spirit.
This is what Catholics would refer to as subjective redemption - applying the Work of Christ's Paschal Mystery to our own particular person. I believe we can both agree that Christ's objective redemption will NOT save all men - as some will refuse. Thus, man has free will. Agreeing with Luther that we have no free will says that our human nature is totally corrupt - and denies the incarnation.
How? Because God could not possibly unite with our nature, our humanity, if we are totally corrupt. Yet, we cannot save ourselves, we have been wounded and need Christ's help to save us. By saying with the Church that we are integrated with Christ's Body, by saying we are in Christ, we say that Christ has entered our nature - not just superficially - and enables us to do meritorious works, because of the actions of the God/Man, who is both Man and God. Our nature, then, united with the nature of God, can do works of value. We cannot initiate, but only cooperate, as Augustine says.
"But the believer will not stand before Christ in judgment: Arise, O LORD; let not man prevail: let the heathen be judged in thy sight"
This would then deny all of the verses that say we will be judged on what we do - for example, Matt 25. It is one of the most common themes of the Bible. I think the above verse is referring more to the fact that we (believers) will not be judged negatively, into eternal damnation, if we are in Christ.
"Christ had to come to pay for our sins so that we would not face judgment."
When you mean "judgment", do you mean that Jesus will not "analyze" what we did during our lives? Our faith as expressed through love? Or do you mean that we will not fail judgment? Do all Christians get a free pass into heaven? How does one say that above statement, but then does not believe in automatic salvation? Please explain, because it sounds contradictory.
"The Sermon on the Mount established an impossible task for man to achieve"
For man, it is impossible, but with God, all things are possible. Again, Catholics believe in an integration with Jesus - who allows us to achieve the dictates of the Sermon. Of course, we will occasionally rebel, but it is possible to love our enemies, to be poor in spirit, etc., through the Spirit moving us.
As you can see, understanding the incarnation will go a long way to understanding the Scriptures better - as I believe Protestant theology is contradictory in some sense regarding salvation and good works. I point you to my post before this one, which thoroughly explains the implications of believing in the incarnation to the fullest.
Thanks again for your questions,
Brother in Christ