Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
Tank you Mom, as always. You have a talent to explain things. Much obliged. I gather from this that, accroding to the beliefs of the Reformed Christinas, man is either enslaved by sin or by righteousness, but never free. Not only do you explain more clearly the belief of the Reformed, but our differences as well. Thanks again.
Gods love or His carnal love?
Even in the sacramental system ( that as a protestant consider works) does not one expect that there are "graces" connected to correct participation? Is not those expectations God owing one for a correct choice or work or participation?
We receive graces ONLY because God promised that He would come to us through such contact. He promised that He would forgive our sins through the power of the Apostles. He promised that He would be our food to eat, our spiritual nourishment. Through the sacraments, we receive God’s graces to continue the journey. They are not works, but means of contacting the one we love.
Could you show me the scripture where Jesus promises giving grace from sacraments?
I think we might agree that an unsaved man can not bring forth good fruit as he is not attached to the vine, so all his fruit would be bad to the Lord. correct?
Towards salvation, I think so. An unsaved atheist might do something “good”, even “loving” because he might be cooperating with God’s Law written in his heart at that time. But we are judged not by one deed, but our entire life. An atheist will not walk in faith in God. So in the end, I think we can agree.
Now on the wise man ... Is wisdom a gift of God or is it like love in your opinion , self generated?
I never said love was self-generated! We love because of Christ. Wisdom, like love, is a gift of the Holy Spirit, who blows where He wills, even to the unsaved.
So you think an unsaved unbeliever that curses Christ might have a gift of the INDWELLING Holy Spirit?
In the Scripture, for example, we find cases of God using pagans to do His will – like Cyrus of the Persians.
We need caution in our examples. The Holy Spirit did not indwell anyone in the Old Testament ( there is one exception in an artisan that was crafting the Temple)
In the OT the Holy Spirit came ON men and MOVED men He did not indwell men. That is the change of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit now indwelled saved men .
God uses all things and people for His purposes, he prophesied through an ass in the OT. That is not the issue here. The question was where does a man get the wisdom to build his life on the Rock? That is divine wisdom, a gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
It is the one who uses his gifts often (the Talents parable) who will be rewarded – not based on his own work, of course, but that he used the talents given to him by God.
I believe that there are rewards for those that are obedient and wise in the use of the gifts of Holy Spirit and the work ordained by God for us. Of special import to me is that we see it as a work of God and not OUR work
Do we agree that there is a wisdom of the carnal man and a wisdom that is from God?
Yes, you have clearly shown that there is a worldly wisdom and a wisdom that follows the ways of God (which do not seem wise to the worldly – tongue twister!!). Carnal wisdom will not be of value, unless it happens to coincide with God’s will, such as those atheists who feel compelled to feed the hungry.
So the man that builds his house on a rock, does not do that out of his own wisdom, but out of the wisdom of the indwelling Holy Spirits guidance.
I agree.
We actually have much agreement huh :)
To whom was he speaking when he told us to love one and other? He was speaking to the converted, the saved , believers . That is because within them dwell the Love of God and the Holy Spirit.
I think Christ intended that we love everyone, even our enemies, don’t you agree? Doesn’t Christ say in the Sermon on the Mount:
I think we are to have a love for all men that demands we present Christ to them, there is no greater love than to share the gospel.
I pointed to that scripture because we a it indicates that only the saved were being given that command with an expectation that they would have the desire to love like Christ, the unsaved can never approach it
You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thy enemy. But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you: That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust. For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? do not even the publicans this? And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this? Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect. (Mat 5:43-48)
In John 13, Jesus is merely giving us confirmation – that we KNOW we are His disciples IF we love – not because we make a one-time faith declaration. We KNOW we are disciples BECAUSE we love everyone – not just our friends.
I think there could be some self deception if we use that as the primary marker. (remember the deceptive heart ?)
The unsaved can not fulfill this command of Christ, only believers can .
It is potentially to all people, since Christ told His Apostles to teach and preach to the entire WORLD (Mat 28:20) ALL that He taught them. The Gospel is NOT meant just for the “saved”, although ONLY the saved will obey it!
Can you fulfill that command? Can you love ANYONE as He has loved ?
Not without Christ, I can’t. But if He abides in me, for example, through the Eucharist, I can love even my enemies and wish them the best for their sake.
What about 15 minutes after communion where the "physical Christ "( in your theology) is no longer present? Does Christ still indwell you? Are you still in Him? Do you still abide in Christ?
The test of this command to me is the day to day interaction with the world. I fail, I must admit, at times.
See we are back to the issue of the love of God indwelling the believer versus the love of men that comes from a carnal heart. God sees no benefit to the "good works"coming from a carnal heart.. Scripture indicates that the only love that is pleasing to God is His love ( and his work).
And I agree that “carnal love” is not meritorious for salvation. I don’t think it is “sinful”, but it is not going to be of value. However, how does one judge whether it is carnal or spiritual love? I would say the inner motivation. If a person does something totally for the sake of the other (emulating Christ), then I would say that deed is inspired by the Spirit and is worthy to be counted as meritorious, even if done by a Muslim.
Can a Muslim, that hates the God of Christianity, that sees Jesus as a prophet no better than Mohammed have the indwelling Holy Spirit? How does he have the love of Christ in his heart? Any love from the heart of an unregenerate man that hates the God of Christianity can not be the love of the Holy Spirit in him. Can God use that man? Yes, just as he used the heathens in the OT to accomplish His will but that does not mean the love expressed is from Christ in his heart.
Who are we to judge whom the ‘saved’ are? We just don’t know while alive on earth. If we judge a tree by its fruits, and we see a productive “tree”, we presume that the Spirit is working within that person, EVEN if that person doesn’t fit into our little religious definitions of who is saved (belong to “x” church or not).
I agree that our "judgment" of the fruit is temporal and not eternal. There are many evil persons that come to Christ in faith on their death beds. But that does not mean that we are not to make judgments in the here and now. Seeing a man that is a pimp, that denies God should cause us to present the gospel to him. If we do not judge that the man would be lost should he die that night, we fail to follow the great commandment. Failure to see the man you are about to get into a business contract with is a thief and a liar and a non believer cause us to deny the words of Christ that we not be unequally yoked. Well said. We just shouldn’t jump to conclusions about another person.
I think we need to be fruit inspectors, not to condemn them but to present Christ and be obedient to Gods commands not to be unequally yoked.
May I ask why you believe the gift of discernment is listed in the gifts of the indwelling Holy Spirit if we are to hold all men as "the same"?
I am not saying that all men are the same, just that we shouldn’t “hate” others because we “think” they are of the “unsaved”.
If we do not have a heart for the unsaved I would question our own salvation. I weep and pray for those that I see no sign of salvation in.
We don’t know WHO is unsaved, really. The Gift of Discernment, I think, is not so much about judging other people’s status with God, but determining the correct path to take – “what is God’s will for us in this particular event that is happening to me?”. That is what discernment is.
I think it works both ways. Yes it is about situations, and to help know truth when it is presented, but I believe that it is also in operation in knowing people that need to hear or learn of Christ, who to marry and who to form alliances and business contracts with, so that e can be obedient and not be unequally yoked.
When you say that we will be 'judged" on our faith working through love" are you talking about judgment to salvation or damnation or judgment for rewards ?
I am not aware of ANYWHERE in Scripture of a place that talks about judgment as receiving lesser rewards. It always seems to be about either entering into eternal bliss, or not entering into eternal bliss.
Mat 6:20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
Mat 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
1Cr 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
1Cr 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
2Ti 4:7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished [my] course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward [is] with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
Rev 3:11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
The scriptures speak of rewards for the saved. One of the things that always strikes me is that it says we will throw our crowns at His feet. The only thing of value we have to give our king are the crowns that he gave us for His work in us..
Rev 4:10 The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying,
Regarding judgment, we are judged based on how well we used the talents God gave us. We are judged how well we used the Spirit’s gifts. We are judged how well we loved, BECAUSE we abided in Christ. Basically, we are judged because we trusted in our Father and cooperated with His Will for us, not because of anything we did ALONE.
As a mother, you might appreciate this analogy…
Say you and your two year old daughter are going to bake cookies. You include her because you love her, not because you need her. You “let” her mix the batter, or place the batter on the cookie sheets. You do this together, a work of love, not because she is earning anything. You enjoy being with her, doing it together. You don’t CARE if she is not needed to make the cookies. That is not the purpose of the activity. And when Daddy comes home and your daughter says “look, Daddy, I made cookies”, would you get upset? Would you say “How dare you say you made the cookies? You are stealing my glory and honor and praise due me! You can do nothing alone!” Of course not. And this is what is going on between God and us. We really CAN say “I made the cookies”, although technically, I couldn’t have done it without the Spirit. It is a work of love. God deeply desires to be with us and work with us, now and in eternal heaven.
The question is truth, did the little girl REALLY make the cookies? If your work really could not be done without God why would you desire to claim autonomy in that act?
I am the LORD, that is My name;
I will not give My glory to another,
Nor My praise to graven images (Isaiah 42:8).
Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
One author writes this observation
"If God, by virtue of His essential being, must be jealous for His uniqueness and His supremacy above all, then those who know Him and want to please Him should be just as jealous for Him. If we are serious about our relationship with Him, we shall exalt Him above everyone and everything else in our lives; we shall be absolutely dedicated to living for His honor; we shall be zealously committed to doing His will. The primary goal of our lives will be to show the world that our God is the one true and living God—that He alone makes life meaningful and worthwhile."
I think this is a wise observation, if we are His we glory in his supremacy and activity in our lives. That is as natural as breathing
Does that make more sense? This is the Catholic point of view on “works” and cooperation with God.
Scripture on that please? {being saved by Baptism}
“Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith to him: How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born again? Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:)
Baptism is nowhere referred to as “born of water” in Scripture. Jesus’ explanation in verse 6 is that He is referring to physical birth.“Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” In other words, there are two types of birth – natural and spiritual.
“Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart, and said to Peter, and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? 38But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call” (Acts 2: 37-39)
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Not who ever is baptized will be saved. Did YOU repent before your baptism in agreement with this scripture?
the Greek word in this verse that is translated is "eis" can also be read as "because of" , this is most consistent with other scripture on salvation and Baptism.
“He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned” (Mark 16:16)
Please notice it is not the absence of Baptism that leads to condemnation it is the lack of belief.
Did You believe before you were Baptised?
why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name. (Acts 22:16)
This was after Paul was saved on the road. The Baptism was as are New testament Baptisms symbolic of the repentance and forgiveness that has already occurred.
For we that are dead to sin, how shall we live any longer therein? Know you not that all we, who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in his death? For we are buried together with him by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life. (Rom 6:2-4)
This does not speak to Baptismal regeneration, it speaks of Baptism being a 'type" of death and resurrection .
In Jewish tradition , a person who converted was baptized to identify conversion. Baptism was a symbolic act , making a decision public. Those who refused to be baptized were saying they did not believe. To the Jewish apostles the idea of an un-baptized believer was unheard of. When a person claimed to believe in Christ, yet was ashamed to proclaim his faith in public, it indicated that he did not have true faith. Paul said he was thankful he had not baptized. Paul the Jewish scholar , the convert on the road, the man that had himself been baptized into Christ.
1 Coth 1:14"I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius"
1 Corth 1:17"For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel - not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power"
I believe that scripture is clear that repentance and faith are necessary for salvation not a magic act preformed on an unknowing , unbelieving, unrepentant infant.
Jhn 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Jhn 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Jhn 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Jhn 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Jhn 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
Jhn 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins.
Jhn 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment::9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
Jhn 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Act 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses
Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Gal 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
There are many more examples of Jesus and the apostles teaching and preaching salvation by Faith. The most potent example is the salvation of the thief on the cross, there was repentance and belief and then the promise of salvation.
And that says what about needing to do works to be saved? Paul later says what he meant by that : 1Cr 2:4, Rom 1:16
Well, of course, our love IS a power of God. Wouldn’t you say that a person who is able to love in the face of persecution and despair is displaying the power of God? Isn’t God’s Power shown the greatest during our weakness?
Is all love the Power of God or only the love generated by God in us?
James teaches that if there are no works there is no saving faith. He is addressing those that may have a profession of faith, yet do not have saving faith in Christ. He does not say that if there is works they give you faith, rather that the works of God come out of your faith in Christ. This book was written to the saved,he was teaching them not how to be saved, but how the world will know that they are Christians.
Pretty much, although I would say that our “works of love” that display our faith come from the Spirit, not our faith. Faith is like getting to first base. Because we get to first doesn’t mean we will score a run. It is only the first step in an ongoing journey.
As I have pointed out works that are pleasing to God are the works He ordains and does through us. It is HE that makes our works worthy not us.
I agree. But let us not forget our “part” in the “work”. At a given moment, we have a choice – to do a good deed or not. We are not irresistibly forced to do something good. Thus, it is OUR good deed (mine and Christ working within me. Without Him, I couldn’t do it, and without me, He allows the good deed to go undone).
I would say "our part" is to be obedient , I still would not say that it is MY work. I would say it is HIS work in me . If i do not do it, it will not remain undone, God will simply have another uncracked vessel to use :)
Abraham was justified before men when he placed his only son on the altar, they were able to see his faith, and the story is still told how it was he trusted God and had faith in God to keep His promise.
There was no one with Abraham to see that. Read the story more carefully. The servants stayed behind. The test was for Abraham. That way, after the fact, he KNEW that he did God’s will. He KNEW he was justified. It was not for the sake of other men to see, but for Abraham HIMSELF. Of course, God already knew.
I am not convinced it was not observed by his servants.However Abraham was often disobedient and had lapses of faith, for sure this was for Him and for his son ( that was an adult and willingly submitted to be the sacrifice ( thus the typology with the Father and Christ being a willing sacrifice). This story as retold by Moses under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit has been an inspiration of faith for all time. It is even claimed by the Muslims as their own. In this act we see Abraham's faith justified, yes to him but also to the world
So then it is your position that if one does not do wrks one loses their salvation? Are the works then for Gods glory or your eternal salvation? Are they serving God or a means to an end?
I hope by the time you get this far, you will see that “my” (Catholic) position is that we must continue to walk in faith. We must continue to cooperate with the graces (talents) that God gave/gives us. We must show our faith through love. If we don’t love, we aren’t saved for heaven.
Is it that if you fail to do works that you lose the salvation you believe you got at your baptism? Would that not be a part of the reason for the works, to get or keep what one has or has lost?
The love we show has several purposes, I suppose. First, it gives glory to God.
Not according to the cookie story :)
It also shows Christ to the world.
Only if He is the proclaimed cause and source of the work, other than that it brings glory to the little girl that claimed credit for the cookies :)
It brings others the truth.
Only if the truth is proclaimed by the one doing the act
Of course, it brings us to fulfillment of our destiny, which even begins in THIS world (as Christ came to bring life, and to live it even today, to the fullest). Our love also brings witness to the world of the truth of God’s Gospel. And of course, finally, it shows we are of Christ.
So what do the good works of Muslims show or the good works of the atheists ?
Indeed the elect will persevere, not in their own strength or power or works, but by the grace of God .
Agree
…Do you believe that, by the grace of God, having turned from your sins and turned to the Son of God to pay for your sins and to give you his own righteousness, you will be received by God as his own dear child, to be loved and blessed by him throughout eternity—that is, that you are saved by God’s unmerited grace (Rom. 3:21–28; 5:1–11)?
Yes, there is nothing I can do alone. My sins deserve eternal punishment. By the grace of God, I can be saved.
Amen !
Indeed we have much agreement. So much so that i must ask you, is one saved by faith or faith and works? If by faith and works, mustn't the faith proceed the works? If our love and works flow out of the indwelling Holy Spirit, must that not mean that the faith has saved us and made us a worthy home for the Holy Spirit in which to dwell. (I assume we agree that the holy Spirit does not live in unregenerate non believers ( saved men)
We do agree on a lot. It is a matter of figuring out the terms. Once we do that, I think we understand each other better. For example, I hope to have shown you that although we talk about “works” as part of salvation, it is not something we do to earn anything, nor is it something we have done by ourselves. Love is something from God, given back for the sake of God.
There is also self generated carnal love, even Hitler loved his mother and the blond arian race. So we need to difference between supernatural love and carnal love .
Yes, faith proceeds the love. We are saved by faith, but not faith alone. That is an important distinction.
But that is what the Bible teaches, that is what Jesus taught. We are saved by our faith, and the indwelling Holy Spirit brings us to do the works of God.
Unless, of course, you consider your definition of faith to include obedience to God.
Without faith there is no obedience to God.
If we said faith means “intellectual knowledge",
No The gospel is foolishness to those that are perishing, look at the men Christ selected, there is no requirement for anything but the faith of a child
even trust in God, and obedience to His will”,
If we are saved we desire to obey God and do His will, the obedience comes from the result of faith ( as it was with Abraham) , it is not the cause of it.
then I think we could say we are saved by faith alone.
That is not too alone :)
Howeve, I am not aware of many defining faith in that way. Personally, after reading the Scriptures, I don’t see how we can factor out love from the formula of salvation. Without it, is it possible for someone to be saved? How much faith does that person possess if he doesn’t have love for his neighbor or God?
I do not think we 'factor out ' love from salvation, but love is a FRUIT of the Holy Spirit, it comes from already being attached to the vine. Regards
I always love talking to ya kosta. I hope all is well and the New year will be a blessing to you my friend.
"Self-love is the predominant principle in the natural man: he loves himself more than he loves God; it is this which lies at the root of depravity and sin."
When Jehovah appeared before Israel in His awesome majesty, and their conscience was smitten by His manifested holiness, they said to Moses, "Go thou near, and hear all that the Lord our God shall say; and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee; and we will hear and do". They were prepared to receive and obey the Lord’s statutes. Yet mark what God said of them, "Oh, that there were such a heart in them, that they would fear Me, and keep all My commandments always". They still lacked the principle of regeneration!
I love Pink !
Thank you,likewise, Mom. Wishing you the most blessed New Year as well.
I couldn't agree more (for me) and thank you as well. I have vowed to read and think about each and every post on this monster. (That's why I've been a day or more behind in responding to everyone for some time :) This has been a tremendous educational and spiritually uplifting experience. God bless.
I wasn't trying to be misleading, I was just trying to make a distinction that MIGHT explain how causation and authorship can coexist, but be different things.
I would disagree with your Pats comparison. In my post I specifically included the element of God's authority or power. The Pats did not have the power or ability as a matter of absolute truth or right to prevent the Broncos from winning. So, the Pats did not cause the loss by playing their hardest and losing to a better team that day. God is completely different, He does have the absolute power and right to make anything happen He chooses. I even said He was the only one who did. Because of God's absolute authority to "make happen" or "not make happen" anything on earth, I said that in a sense He "causes" these things.
A different way to look at it is that God has a plan, God knows all things, God always gets what He wants, God leaves nothing to chance, God "causes" all things. I think it is misleading for someone to then follow with "then God causes evil, we believe in a loving God, not your evil God". I think that is disingenuous.
So, here is another example that the "elect" are the (s)elect few (for not all Christians suffered) who do what others are not called to do, and are considered Christian heroes (martyrs and saints).
I read your post a few times to try to figure out what in the world you were talking about :) and the only thing I can figure is that you see the whole concept of the "elect" as God's MVP Christians. You appear to hold that there exist people who will go to heaven, but since they are not MVPs, they are not the elect. God appears to care about these elite Christians much, much more so than the serf Christians.
So, since my example was a salutation (not a message) Peter was not addressing regular Christians, only the MVPs. I suppose, then, that when Paul begins his letter:
"2 To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours: ...
... that all non-Corinthian Christians need pay no attention to this letter because they were not being addressed. Of course by such reasoning, this wipes out most of the NT for us. This is unfortunate.
If God died for the sake of all men, then why isn't each and every man saved - if man has nothing to do with salvation?
Finally without agreeing with me in the slightest I trust that you can understand why I understand that your involvement with God in your salvation makes you the final arbiter; that applies to the other guy also.
With all due respect, I disagree with you. As a matter of fact, I would say that "perseverance of the saints" is a doctrine where the so-called "saint" is the final arbiter. According to each and every Calvinist, they somehow KNOW that they are one of the elect. As of right now, I don't know, nor do I presume to know that I am of the elect. How does my point of view make me the final arbiter of salvation, while your presumption to be in the Book of Life - and not to be blotted out - is not?
Regards
The fact that we sin PERIOD after our 'salvation' tells us that man's "fleshy" nature has not been completely turned to God. Yes, our works are a fruit of our salvation, but not irresistibly so. In some mysterious manner, God and man begin to cooperate after the 'salvation' event. Thus, man is somehow involved in "working out his salvation". If it was ALL God without any cooperation from me, then I would never sin - my will would not interfere anymore with the Will of God. I can tell you that this is not the case with me!
I agree that the truth does not come from my own opinions in my human capacity. There have been several truths in the Bible that did not make sense to me when I first heard them, but I later accepted. Hopefully that is a good sign. :)
At some point, we all have to determine if we have had truth given to us. We must accept that truth given by another. If it comes from "within", we really have to wonder if it is objective truth or not. There seems to be a fine line on what is truth and what is not. That is why I rely on another source - which I believe is guided by God - rather than from myself.
So, two people could use the same lens when reading a verse and come to different results within the lens. But this must be distinguished from what is outside the lens, thus, neither person could reach such a conclusion. Is that close enough? :)
I have read different Church Fathers read the same passage in different meanings and interpretations. None of them were outside the realm of what the Church teaches, but God's Spirit was working within them to see a different truth expressed by the same verses. Some read the verses in a literal sense, some a analogical sense, others seeing a moral sense to the same verse. Often times, a verse has multiple layers of meaning. Remember, Catholics believe they have been given a Divine teaching through the Apostles. Some of it was written down in Scripture, some was not. The parts NOT written down includes interpretation of those same Scripture. For example, when we read about verses that seem to make Christ subordinate to God, we don't change our view that Christ IS God - of the same substance - because that is what we were taught. Thus, supposed contradictions on the surface are explained through the total teachings given to us.
If all I had was the one statement, you'd be right. If I had many other of your statements, showing how you use language, along with a detailed view of your nature, then I think it would be possible to arrive at a correct interpretation.
Our respective religious communities' continued separation should be enough proof to show that men do not come to the same ideas about God by merely reading a book. What is needed is a living, teaching authority that protects the SENSE of what the Book was meant to teach. Consider our own nation's Constitution. The Founding Fathers felt that it could not be protected on its own merits, so they instituted a living body to protect its meaning - the Supreme Court. It is their job to interpret the Constitution's meaning and apply it to today's problems. They haven't done a wonderful job, frankly. But it isn't guided by the Holy Spirit, which is what Christ promised His Church.
And, if we needed any of those things, I suppose God would have included them in the Bible.
Why? If the future Scriptures were meant to be so determinative for future Christians, why didn't Christ (God) commission the Apostles to write new Scripture? Why didn't Christ give the Apostles a Divine Book that would serve to help them teach the faith? The History of Christian expansion, especially the first 50 years, was almost strictly WITHOUT the New Testament. Remember, Christ commissioned a body of men to teach and preach what He taught - promising them that the Holy Spirit would protect them from falsely teaching His doctrine. He never mentions ANYTHING about a future Scripture, or to even WRITE a Scripture for Christians to follow.
So, I would say that any teaching or tradition is presumably fine as long as it is firmly consistent with the Bible, or at the very least, non-offensive to scripture
That is true, considering that BOTH Tradition and Scripture are from God. It would follow that the two would not disagree, since God is not the Author of lies.
If a cult started ordaining openly gay Bishops, then I would question whether they are worshiping the true God. :)
I agree, but to be honest, WHO makes the decision when a "group" has "crossed the line" of what is considered Christian? I think that is a slippery slope, one subject to the individual's opinion. Personally, I find obedience to the Church in line with God's means of bringing His people to Him as seen throughout the Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments. In either case, men don't come to God without that authoritative heirarchy, whether it be the Jewish religious leaders, or the Christian religious leaders.
Men do the converting?
God normally works THROUGH the actions of men. God did not appear to me in glorious bodily form. He first called to me of late through a Protestant couple down the street from us. We are moved by the witness of others who follow the Gospel, not just talk it.
Regards
That's OK, and thank you for the kind words. I apologize to you and all Freepers for being a day behind in all of my answers recently. I've found this thread so educational that I'm going through every post. There just aren't enough hours. :)
I am not sure where you are in the large Protestant spectrum of individualized beliefs, so I cannot with certainty know what you believe unless you specifically state it. And sometimes your statements raise more questions.
I've been attending a Southern Baptist church for about the last 15 years. I have agreed with the vast majority of the theology taught there. But then recently, it was pointed out to me, based on my posts on another thread, that my beliefs are consistent with Reformed theology. I honestly didn't even really know what is was. :) Anyway, with many thanks to other Reformed Freepers, they have been giving me links and teachings, especially through threads like this! I really like what I've read so far. So, it doesn't surprise me that some of my statements are raising more questions. :) I know that I will be making some mistakes as I'm learning the consistent view. I appreciate everyone who has corrected my consistency and I have learned so much.
So, whence came the evil? You surely must believe that God, who is the source and cause of everything and all, created Satan.
I do believe that God created satan.
Then, how did Satan become evil? By his disobedience to God, or by God's desire?
Yes.
I would wager, unless you deny this too, that you believe that God created Satan good at first, with the intention that he become evil. Thus, you are contradicting yourself.
As you would expect, I would say that your first statement is right, but I do not contradict myself. In other posts I have been making the case that concerning evil, there is a distinction between authorship and causation. (I do not claim this is Reformed theology as I don't know, so I admit that I'm flying solo on this one.)
When you ask whether it was God's intent that satan become evil I would first say that satan did not get the evil from God because He does not have it to offer. God allowed it, but had the full authority and power to prevent it. So, in a sense, God intended it because He didn't prevent it, but the evil itself did not originate from God. God created what became evil, first satan, then Adam, then the rest of us.
You keep saying God's point of view (POV) and our POV. If God is in complete control, there is no such thing as our POV. Don't you see the trap? By denying the free will, the whole of Creation, man's fall from grace, sin, repentance, redemption, the Lord's suffering etc. lose their purpose and meaning as they are simply keystrokes on God's keyboard.
I admit I do not see the trap. If God's plan goes forth perfectly in His perfect knowledge, then why does your listing lose its purpose and meaning to God? He gets everything He wants. I have admitted that it is a mystery to me that if God knows everything, and there is no learning for Him, then why get out of bed in the morning? I'm sure the real answer is great, but it's way out of my league. :)
But from our POV, of course we all think of ourselves as having free will because we do not know the future. We don't even know what we'll make for breakfast this morning, so we'll employ free will and choose. That's a reasonable thing for us to think, but in God's truth it isn't right.
If you'll allow me to turn the tables, if it is bad that "everything" comes down to God's key strokes, are you implying that God needs the surprise of our free will decisions to make things interesting? You appear to be asking why God would go through the bother of Christ's death, etc., if everything is already set in stone. I have no idea other than it is His will. It is easier for me to rest in that than it is that God sits around wondering what we crazy humans are going to do next.
God is perfectly free, so how can He be subject to His own plan? You can accept that, as you accept that He allows evil, but you do not accept that He gave us free will to choose, that He does not allow us to reciprocate His love freely!?
I would say that God is subject to His own plan in the same sense that "God cannot sin". We both know that if God sinned that He would cease being our God and become something else. Does this mean that God is not all powerful? I say of course not. God is subject to who He is, to His nature. Therefore He WILL not do what is against His nature. The possibility of finding a mistake in His perfect plan (requiring change) would be against the nature of God.
As for loving Him freely, I do not think that we are robots. I do think that every capacity we have to love God comes not from us but from God. From our perspective, our free choice to love God sure seems real because it, at first, is so new to us. And, God knew from the beginning all that would happen.
This you do dsipute thet fact that the Bible shows that God does change His mind (Gen 6:6), either on His own or in response to our repentance (numerous exmaples), which I mentioned earlier, and which you refuse to acknowledge.
You're right that I have refused to acknowledge that God changes His mind. And, you cite a good verse in support of your position. (You know what's coming next :) HOWEVER, I still think that God knew that mankind would become wicked and that His heart would be grieved. Sin grieves God's heart, so that's to be expected. It was part of His original, perfect plan. I liken it to when God asked Adam where he was in the garden. Was it because He did not know? Or, was Abraham really a better negotiator than God when he bargained on behalf of Sodom? I think all these verses are meant to teach us the nature of God.
You also make a mistake of believing that somehow out "nature" changes when we accept Christ. This is not a David Copperfield magic show -- click, and you become a dove! Our nature does not change.
I respectfully disagree. I am referring to the sin nature being discarded by the Spirit and replaced with a regenerated nature. We still sin after salvation because remnants of the old nature remain and satan does still attack us and tempt us. After all, we are still human even after we are saved (but don't ask a liberal if that's true :)
Gal. 5:24-25 : "24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit."
Rom. 6:6-11 : "6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7 because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.
8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God. 11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus."
I really hesitate to come back into this thread but perhaps if you read these writings by three of the Fathers you'll see whence Kosta is speaking.
Welcome back, Kolo! I originally wrote you a 19,000-word response to this with 187 separate issues I was asking you to address (a normal post for me). But, then I decided to scrap it. I didn't want to singlehandedly be responsible for a new Freepathon because new hard drive space was needed for my posts! :)
Thank you very much for those passages. While I don't claim to get all of it, I think I see that a relationship or union with God is very desired, it is just a little more involved than something I would be used to.
Could you show me the scripture where Jesus promises giving grace from sacraments?
God tends to work through the visible realm when He grants graces to men (and women). First, a sacrament is a visible sign of God's invisible graces. A sacrament is God's action made visible. With that broad definition in mind, we can point to MANY things DAILY that make God's grace visible: your children and husband. your work. the people whom you meet. the events in your life. ALL are means of God's grace reaching out to us. The Scriptures, esp. the OT, clearly show that God works through men (and women) to bring His salvation to people: Moses, Abraham, Judith, Ruth, Samuel, David, and so forth. This is the way God works and continues to work - He wants us to "see" His activity in our lives! Isn't it so much easier to love God when we "see" Him really blessing us, rather than some abstract concept? It is instrumental to understanding Catholicism - this concept of sacramentalism (that God works through the visible to bless us). When I teach religion, THIS concept is (along with the incarnation) the heart of Catholicism, one I ensure everyone understands.
I first wanted to make the above statement, as it will help you understand how we believe that God works in a special way through the Church sacraments. For example, God's forgiveness and mercy is SEEN through the sacrament of Baptism. The outward sign, the washing with water, signifies the real cleansing of the soul taking place:
"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish" Eph 5:25-27
"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" Titus 3:5
"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." 1 Peter 3:20-21
So you think an unsaved unbeliever that curses Christ might have a gift of the INDWELLING Holy Spirit?
No. Not all Muslims curse Christ. A person can be a Muslim and not actively "hate" Christ, just as a Protestant can be a Christian and not believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation. And secondly, God does not judge us based on what we don't know. How much does a Muslim in the middle of Iraq know about Jesus Christ? He has been given only one side of the story.
I believe that there are rewards for those that are obedient and wise in the use of the gifts of Holy Spirit and the work ordained by God for us. Of special import to me is that we see it as a work of God and not OUR work
A note here is in order. I have taken great pains to tell you that we COOPERATE with God. I have over and over said that we do NOTHING ALONE. I want to make it clear one final time that Catholics do NOT believe we do anything of our own. We believe that God works within us to do anything of value. But because it is a amalgamation (Christ and I), I can say it is "my" work, understanding that it is not mine ALONE. Rest assured, we naturally understand that nothing of our own, alone, is worthy of salvation.
I think there could be some self deception if we use that as the primary marker. (remember the deceptive heart ?)
I totally agree, which is why Catholics say we cannot KNOW for absolute certain, that we will go to heaven when we die. We can be "pretty sure", based on our examination of our actions (moved by God, of course), but we can never be certain. We run the race until the end.
The question is truth, did the little girl REALLY make the cookies? If your work really could not be done without God why would you desire to claim autonomy in that act?
You are reading into the story what is not there. The girl never said "I made the cookies by MYSELF". We don't claim any autonomy from God in our actions of love. That is important to understand. Unless someone actually says, "I did it WITHOUT God", we cannot assume that someone is EXCLUDING God from the action. The point of the story is to say that God SHARES His glory with man. So your quote from Isaiah 42 also misses the point. No, God does not GIVE His glory up to men, but as a Lover, He shares it. Being married, you should be familiar with the concept of love = sharing of SELF. Since marriage is a sign of what God does towards His bride, the Church (Eph 5 quoted above), WE can say that we, TOO, share in the life of God, His glory, and even in His work. We share in His work of creation, for example ("you" brought life into the world, did you not? You are not going to deny that "you" were involved? All that pain and so forth?). By sharing, though, we are not EXCLUDING God! But it is BECAUSE God IS Love that He shares of Himself.
Baptism is nowhere referred to as “born of water” in Scripture. Jesus’ explanation in verse 6 is that He is referring to physical birth.“Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” In other words, there are two types of birth – natural and spiritual.
Jesus specifically refutes the idea that being "born from above" refers to a physical birth to Nicodemus' confusion in verse 4. Thus, "born of water" is NOT physical birth...Jesus is merely making a distinction between the physical and the spiritual. Spiritual birth is different then physical birth.
I believe that scripture is clear that repentance and faith are necessary for salvation not a magic act preformed on an unknowing , unbelieving, unrepentant infant
Are you familiar with circumcision? It was the means by which people were admitted into the People of God in the Old Testament. Notice that vast majority of them were infants. Did the infants ASKED to be entered into the People of God? No. The parents brought the child to the Temple, covenanting with God on behalf of the child. Circumcision is an important parallel and link with Baptism. Christ elevated that ordinance of the OT to a new and perfected level of grace. Early Christians were quite aware of this, as Paul writes in Colossians:
"In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ. Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." Col 2:11-12
These Christians knew the effects of Baptism was to regenerate, to wash away sin and bring grace. They knew that Circumcision was a shadow of the good things to come. It had no power to save, but they knew that now, Baptism saves you (1 Peter 3:21, quoted above). They knew these things because they were taught it by the Apostles. Further proof of this is found in historical writings of the practices of the earliest Christians. It would seem strange that they would ignore the teachings of the Apostles UNAMINOUSLY and institute infant baptism if it wasn't taught by the Apostles. Recall, everything that Christians did and believed are not written down within the Scriptures.
I wrote: "I am not aware of ANYWHERE in Scripture of a place that talks about judgment as receiving lesser rewards. It always seems to be about either entering into eternal bliss, or not entering into eternal bliss."
None of those verses you gave me told me anything about people who were judged lacking in love receiving a smaller reward in heaven. Judgment is always in the context of either one is rewarded with heaven or punished to eternal hell
There are many more examples of Jesus and the apostles teaching and preaching salvation by Faith. The most potent example is the salvation of the thief on the cross, there was repentance and belief and then the promise of salvation.
The faith of the good thief was not alone, however. He first repented of his evil. Secondly, his actions of love for Christ were shown in his defense against the words of the bad thief. Even in this case, I see faith with love.
I wrote "The love we show has several purposes, I suppose. First, it gives glory to God.
Not according to the cookie story :)
Again, the child did not take glory away from the mother. Did the mother react in that fashion? Did the father believe that the child did everything herself WITHOUT the mother? When we love, it is understood that we are giving God glory - we already have established that I or you cannot love WITHOUT God! It is important to realize that the girl is NOT excluding the mother, nor do we exclude God when we say "I love you".
I wrote "We are saved by faith, but not faith alone. That is an important distinction.
But that is what the Bible teaches, that is what Jesus taught.
Jesus NEVER excluded anything when He said we are saved by faith. The language does not exclude anything, but makes a positive statement about faith. I believe your theology is reading into what is not there. Jesus taught in various places that we are saved by faith, and in other places, it is clear that He also taught that we are saved by our loving actions. Please note...He also says we can do NOTHING without Him. So take all of what He says TOGETHER - we are saved by faith and by loving actions (which we can do ONLY because we abide in Him). Thus we are not saved by our OWN works. But our works WITH or IN Christ are necessary for salvation into heaven.
I do not think we 'factor out ' love from salvation, but love is a FRUIT of the Holy Spirit, it comes from already being attached to the vine.
Are you then claiming that faith is from you, and not from God? Is the source of your faith different than the source of your love? Why are you making these distinctions regarding the source of faith and love? They both come from God, as GIFTS! As long as we abide in Him, we will grow in BOTH faith and love.
Regards
I understand that the Pats vs. Broncos analogy is imperfect, but it does the job insofar as it shows that when, -- either for reasons of insufficient power (Pats) or infinite love (God), -- the outcome Pats or God did not wish for, happen, then you cannot say that Pats, or God, caused the outcome.
It strikes me that Protestants and Catholics are talking past each other, with the real dispute being that each of us knows that our view is correct and, therefore, concluding that any other view is incorrect when, maybe, the views aren't really that different.
The Reformation was waged on the distinct "view" in Scripture that salvation is of the Lord.
Either God ordains salvation by His grace through faith in Jesus Christ, or men cooperate with God, help God, obey God, please God, and acquire salvation through the partaking of sacraments and through their own righteous choice to believe.
But Scripture says because of Adam's fall all men are dead in sin and none is righteous and we can only do anything God-pleasing after we are born again by His will alone.
Synergism/monergism.
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." -- Titus 3:4-7"But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
OK
Could you show me the scripture where Jesus promises giving grace from sacraments?
God tends to work through the visible realm when He grants graces to men (and women). First, a sacrament is a visible sign of God's invisible graces.
I would like a citation where Jesus ever promised grace though a sacrament . Catholics see that the sacraments are a source of grace necessary for salvation. I do not see anywhere that Christ told the church there were graces by participating in "sacraments".
We are told that God is visible all around us, but we are never told that through "sacraments" God is visible or that he has special blessings in them does he? I would be interested in the citations where sacraments are taught as a special source of grace
I first wanted to make the above statement, as it will help you understand how we believe that God works in a special way through the Church sacraments. For example, God's forgiveness and mercy is SEEN through the sacrament of Baptism. The outward sign, the washing with water, signifies the real cleansing of the soul taking place:
We obviously disagree that baptism washes any more than dirt off the head of the baptized infant. My Presbyterian church baptizes infants as a visible sign of the covenant between God and His church. I happen to take more of a credo Baptist position, however neither system holds any magic in the water. We would deny that baptism saves the infant and now that salvation is his to loose. I would say it is an outward sign of an inward change. The change preceded the symbol, just as it does in scripture... unless the infants can repent and believe BEFORE that baptism .
"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish" Eph 5:25-27
The "word" spoken of is consistent with the word of faith
AUGUSTINE [Tract 80, in John], "Take away the word, and what is the water save water? Add the word to the element, and it becomes a sacrament, being itself as it were the visible word." The regenerating efficacy of baptism is conveyed in, and by, the divine word alone.
Does the infant baptized speak a word of faith FIRST?
So you think an unsaved unbeliever that curses Christ might have a gift of the INDWELLING Holy Spirit?
No. Not all Muslims curse Christ. A person can be a Muslim and not actively "hate" Christ, just as a Protestant can be a Christian and not believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation. And secondly, God does not judge us based on what we don't know. How much does a Muslim in the middle of Iraq know about Jesus Christ? He has been given only one side of the story
There are few Muslims that have not HEARD and refused the gospel. Their denial of Christ IS hatred of Christ. It seems you have no problem believing contrary to scripture that men can be saved without Christ, and the Holy Spirit of God will indwell one that does not know Christ.
Lets see what God says of their worship of a false god. Have you seen the pictures of them bowing down to that huge block ?
Exd 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me
Those that God is speaking of bowed down to their gods not knowing any other god but theirs, God says they hated Him
The unsaved world hates Christ
Jhn 15:18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before [it hated] you.
Paul says this
Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
James put it this way
Jam 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
Are you then saying that those that deny Christ have the indwelling Spirit of God living in them? Do you believe that a belief in Christ is necessary to be saved?
I totally agree, which is why Catholics say we cannot KNOW for absolute certain, that we will go to heaven when we die. We can be "pretty sure", based on our examination of our actions (moved by God, of course), but we can never be certain. We run the race until the end.
That sounds as if your salvation is merited by the works you do?? Is not salvation by grace (Gods unmerited favor)?
The bible says we can have an assurance of our own salvation. I can only say I have a peace with my eternity, I know God has saved me. I did not deserve it, I did not earn it and without His ever present grace I could never persevere in it. God has replaced that deceptive heart with a new one, on which he sits on the throne.
You know I worked in a hospital for many years, I had an opportunity to see death many many times. I have heard it said that Christians" die well" . Having watched death many times, I have seen men cry out in fear of the unknown and plead not to die, and I have seen people look to death as a reunion with God and smile as they leave this life into the next.
Most memorable is a frail elderly Black Baptist woman, that was facing surgery that might be the end of her life. I held her hand and asked if she would like prayer. She looked at me and said "honey, when I pass I will be a at banquet table where i will never be hungry or want again. I will just be going home.
That is dying well because of that inner assurance :)
I believe that there are rewards for those that are obedient and wise in the use of the gifts of Holy Spirit and the work ordained by God for us. Of special import to me is that we see it as a work of God and not OUR work
A note here is in order. I have taken great pains to tell you that we COOPERATE with God. I have over and over said that we do NOTHING ALONE. I want to make it clear one final time that Catholics do NOT believe we do anything of our own. We believe that God works within us to do anything of value. But because it is a amalgamation (Christ and I), I can say it is "my" work, understanding that it is not mine ALONE. Rest assured, we naturally understand that nothing of our own, alone, is worthy of salvation.
I guess I see that as skirting a bit. God and I do it, so I can say I do it ? Who naturally understands that God is not the prime mover? The unsaved? The people that give out awards to men? I think I understand what you are saying, I would just say the bible says if you get the praise of men there are no eternal rewards
Mat 6:1 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. 2 Therefore when thou doest [thine] alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
So someone that feeds the hungry and then gets the Christian of the year award has no heavenly reward for that . On the other hand, when it is made clear that the deed is in the name of the Lord
Mar 9:41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
I do not know about you, but I know that my ego is still sinful enough that I like the appreciation of men, I have to be conscious at all times that the work is Gods and the glory is Gods, i am simply a tool in the hand of the master
The question is truth, did the little girl REALLY make the cookies? If your work really could not be done without God why would you desire to claim autonomy in that act?
You are reading into the story what is not there. The girl never said "I made the cookies by MYSELF".
Now you know that was the implication of the entire story. She said look at the cookies I MADE
Lying by omission is still lying :)
That is important to understand. Unless someone actually says, "I did it WITHOUT God", we cannot assume that someone is EXCLUDING God from the action. The point of the story is to say that God SHARES His glory with man. So your quote from Isaiah 42 also misses the point. No, God does not GIVE His glory up to men, but as a Lover, He shares it. Being married, you should be familiar with the concept of love = sharing of SELF. Since marriage is a sign of what God does towards His bride, the Church (Eph 5 quoted above), WE can say that we, TOO, share in the life of God, His glory, and even in His work. We share in His work of creation, for example ("you" brought life into the world, did you not? You are not going to deny that "you" were involved? All that pain and so forth?). By sharing, though, we are not EXCLUDING God! But it is BECAUSE God IS Love that He shares of Himself.
So your quote from Isaiah 42 also misses the point. No, God does not GIVE His glory up to men, but as a Lover, He shares it. Being married, you should be familiar with the concept of love = sharing of SELF.
WWJD ?
Jhn 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
Jhn 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he], and [that] I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
The son of God praised the work of the Father IN Him .
Jhn 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
Jhn 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Even the Apostles gave credit to God for the works of Christ, might it be that Christ gave them that example?
Act 10:38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
Did Jesus omit the source of His works expecting that men would just "know" they were done by God in Him?
I believe that scripture is clear that repentance and faith are necessary for salvation not a magic act preformed on an unknowing , unbelieving, unrepentant infant
Are you familiar with circumcision? It was the means by which people were admitted into the People of God in the Old Testament. Notice that vast majority of them were infants. Did the infants ASKED to be entered into the People of God? No. The parents brought the child to the Temple, covenanting with God on behalf of the child. Circumcision is an important parallel and link with Baptism. Christ elevated that ordinance of the OT to a new and perfected level of grace. Early Christians were quite aware of this, as Paul writes in Colossians:
They were not saved by circumcision, it was a mark of the covenant. The NT says repent , believe. be baptized. When a 4 week old infant can obey that command I might see baptism as an efficacious act :)
I wrote: "I am not aware of ANYWHERE in Scripture of a place that talks about judgment as receiving lesser rewards. It always seems to be about either entering into eternal bliss, or not entering into eternal bliss."
None of those verses you gave me told me anything about people who were judged lacking in love receiving a smaller reward in heaven. Judgment is always in the context of either one is rewarded with heaven or punished to eternal hell
You said you were not aware of a judgment of rewards, that is was always about salvation, I pointed you to the scripture that says the elect have rewards in heaven. Perhaps there were no scriptures that said that those that 'loved less " got less rewards because there is no such scripture.
There are many more examples of Jesus and the apostles teaching and preaching salvation by Faith. The most potent example is the salvation of the thief on the cross, there was repentance and belief and then the promise of salvation.
The faith of the good thief was not alone, however. He first repented of his evil. Secondly, his actions of love for Christ were shown in his defense against the words of the bad thief. Even in this case, I see faith with love.
What you do not see is Baptism or Purgatory. We are back to was it the carnal love of a man or the perfect love of the Holy Spirit indwelling the thief?
He was saved by faith alone. He followed the biblical mandate to acknowledge himself as a sinner in need of a Savior and he acknowledged Christ as that savior .. Remember when Peter recognized Jesus as Lord? What did Jesus say to him?
Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
I believe we can have assurance that The father in heaven revealed the person of Christ to the thief , just as He did to Peter and just as He does to us.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
I wrote "We are saved by faith, but not faith alone. That is an important distinction.
But that is what the Bible teaches, that is what Jesus taught.
Jesus NEVER excluded anything when He said we are saved by faith. The language does not exclude anything, but makes a positive statement about faith. I believe your theology is reading into what is not there.
You are building a doctrine based on what Jesus did not "exclude" and you say that I am building a theology on what is not there? The doctrine of the reformation is based on exactly what scripture teaches, it is not built on the silence of scripture on a point
Jesus taught in various places that we are saved by faith, and in other places, it is clear that He also taught that we are saved by our loving actions.
Did he? Or did he say that the Sheep ( the elect) preform God pleasing works, and the Goats do not? He never says that they are saved by their works, He only speaks of the works done by both groups. The goats were never sheep and the sheep were never goats.
Please note...He also says we can do NOTHING without Him. So take all of what He says TOGETHER - we are saved by faith and by loving actions (which we can do ONLY because we abide in Him). Thus we are not saved by our OWN works. But our works WITH or IN Christ are necessary for salvation into heaven.
I know a works based salvation is a very tempting thing to believe. That makes us responsible for our own salvation. Men like to be responsible for themselves. There is no scripture anywhere that says one can not be saved without works, but there are scriptures that say one can not be saved without faith.
The point of these discussions is to ATTEMPT to explain our point of view so as to clear away misunderstanding. The words "faith" and "salvation" have different meanings to us, so we must first figure out that. Next, we both have particular assumptions and paradigms that we view Scritpure through. This takes some explaining. In my experience, however, we find ourselves closer together than we previously thought. This is a positive for Christianity.
Regards
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.