Posted on 03/08/2011 10:19:18 AM PST by NYer
Protestants say we’re saved by faith. Some Catholics say we’re saved by good works.
What does the Bible say?
This Sunday’s readings* are clear — it’s neither. And it’s both. At the very same time.
First, let’s define our terms. When St. Paul says “works” don’t save us, he is really referring to two things. First of all, he is speaking about the “works” of the Mosaic Law, which include everything from keeping dietary regulations to observing the Ten Commandments. Secondly, he means good actions performed by willpower, without any particular help from God. Paul had thought that rigorous observance of the Law, carrying out its prescribed works, was the key to making a person right with God. But his attempts to observe the law met with frustration (see Romans 7:15-24). The Law made him aware of God’s will but did not enable him to carry it out. “I cannot even understand my own actions. I do not do what I want to do but what I hate … what a wretched man I am!” His attempts at outward observance didn’t change his heart. In fact his heart was so far from God that he cruelly persecuted the followers of Jesus, looking on in approval as St. Stephen was stoned to death.
In Romans 3:23 St. Paul lays it out: We have all sinned seriously. None of us, on our own steam and by our own merits, can ever do enough to earn God’s favor. So God has fixed the problem — he gives us his favor as a free, undeserved gift in response to the sacrifice of Jesus, His son. We become pleasing to him, reconciled to him, not by our own efforts but by the cross of Christ. We receive this gift through the act of faith. So we are saved by faith, not by the works — at least not by the works of the Mosaic Law, done by our own strength.
So the faith camp wins? Not so fast. Let’s take a closer look at what the Bible means by faith.
Many people think that faith is belief. Belief that God exists … that Jesus is the son of God … that Jesus rose from the dead. Intellectual assent to all these truths is of course important, and is an indispensable part of the act of faith. Such belief often leads to religious actions — the hanging of crucifixes in our home, the wearing of medals, the recitation of prayers. These acts of piety are also good.
But Sunday’s Gospel says that mere belief and acts of piety are not enough to save us. Those rejected by God in Matt 7:21-23 clearly “believed” in Jesus; in fact, they prophesied and worked miracles in Jesus’ name. Perhaps they also said novenas in his name. But he said to them “out of my sight, you evil doers.” One of the strongest lines in the gospels provides an explanation: “None of those who cry out, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of God but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”
Biblical faith is not just belief. It is surrender. It is a complete entrusting of oneself to God in Christ and acceptance of his power, his will, and his plan. If we truly say yes to Him and let his grace into our hearts, we’ll never be the same. His love begins to work through us and change our lives. His Spirit takes up residence within us, giving us the strength to do what we could never do on our own, even to begin to love like He loves.
So true biblical faith is not passive. It is active, dynamic and alive. That’s why St. James says that faith without works is dead (James 2:24-26). Abraham believed that an unknown God was calling him to leave civilization and march into the desert to find a land that this God has promised him. Abraham did not sit and contemplate this call or set up a shrine to this God. He got up and began walking (Genesis 12).
So we are justified by faith, if we mean the authentic biblical faith that causes us to walk in God’s ways. And we are justified by works, if we mean the works of charity that can only flow from faith and grace.
So really, it’s not faith vs. works. It’s faith that works.
I explained earlier that some who claim the “sinner’s prayer” and fall away are like those in the parable of the soils whose hearts aren’t pure and whose faith withered away. It is a free gift - some just don’t receive the gift with a true heart.
“He commanded us to baptize in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to make men sons and daughters of God.” You have mixed up the sequence of commands....We are to first make diciples (new believers in Jesus); then they are to be baptized. we weren’t commanded to baptize unbelievers then teach them about Christ.
You seem hung up on the command to make disciples and baptize. What about Jesus’ statement that unless one is born again (or born from above) they cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven. You can teach people and baptize them all you want, but unless that person has been born again, they will not enter the kingdom of Heaven.
By what authority do you claim your interpretation is any more valid? Mine makes more sense then yours does, and the literal meaning of each word validates my point more taqhtn yours.
What does the clear literal meaning of Hebrews 9:12 say? Why won’t you offer an interpretation for that verse?
Tell me if these verses are literal or a metaphor Matt. 26:26-28 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, "Take and eat; this is my body." 27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, 16 and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.
So we are still in our sin... just not liable for penalty? What of the "regenerated" Christian who commits murder (and please don't deny that there have been some in history)?
Christians have 2 natures. As Paul points out when one is born again, they are filled with the Holy Spirit, but the “old man” or flesh nature is still present in the believer at war with the Holy Spirit. Everyone still sins because we still have the flesh nature within us, which will remain until we get to Heaven.
And what if we give in to the "flesh nature"...?
and of course you have an official Vatican document verifying this claim.
As for sin from generation to generation: Romans 3:10-12: As it is written, ‘There is NONE righteous, no not one. There is none that understandeth: there is is none that seeketh God. They have all gone out of the way; they have been made altogether unprofitable; there is NONE that doeth good, no not one.”
And again in Romans 3:20- “Therefore by the works of the Law shall NO flesh be justified in his sight; for by the Law cometh the knowledge of sin.”
Romans 3:22-26, 27-28 - “To wit, the righteousness of God by the faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all who BELIEVE. For there is no difference: for all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God. And are JUSTIFIED FREELY BY HIS GRACE, through the REDEMPTION that is in Christ Jesus. Whom God hath set forth to be a RECONCILIATION THROUGH FAITH in his blood to declare his righteousness by the forgiveness of the sins that are passed. “
“Where is then the rejoicing? It is excluded. By what Law of works? Nay, but by the Law of FAITH. Therefore we conclude that a man is JUSTIFIED BY FAITH without the works of the Law.”
All men have sinned, all are Hell-bound upon entry into this world. It is Christ alone who can change this. Nothing we do, nothing we CAN do, can earn our salvation. Any “works” are a RESULT of regeneration and the saving faith we possess. It is part of the sanctification process - not the Justification - which, as Paul says here clearly, is accomplished through faith alone in Christ’s sacrifice. He is sufficient and He alone can do what we cannot in our flesh, being creatures of sin.
Nope. Just a knowledge that, as seen clearly in this thread, there is a firm belief in Confession before death, Baptism and numerous other “acts” in order to gain entrance to Heaven. As for needing anything from the vatican to prove that God deals with individuals and saves individually, the vatican is no authority on God. I’ll go to Scripture for that, thanks.
No more so than Jesus. Do a search in Bible Gateway for the words "baptism", "baptize" and "baptizing" and you will find that this is a major theme of the Gospels. No one is suggesting baptizing those unaffiliated with Christ as the Mormons do. Of course, you baptize those who come to Christ or (in their unknowing) you take the responsibility to raise others in the knowledge of Christ who can't come to know first of their own accord... infants, mentally impaired, et al.
What about Jesus’ statement that unless one is born again (or born from above) they cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven.
Nicodemus had a hard time with this too. John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Catholics see this as occurring in baptism and confirmation just as His Disciples were baptized during His Life and received the Spirit at Pentecost.
I’m not sure what point you were trying to make... but nothing you posted here contradicts what I’ve said.
There is the final distinction... authority. To whom has it been given and how do we know? It was given to the Apostles by Christ and we can see it in the New Testament as they wielded it. They were not commanded by Christ to write a book so the faithful would have something to follow (and be patient for Guttenberg to come along 1,500 years later so everyone can finally have one). They were commanded to grow Christ's Church and this Church has authority (1 Tim 3:15) as shown by the Epistles--letters written for reproof, correction, and encouragement.
We can see in the beginning of Acts that the Apostles had the authority to bestow Apostleship to replenish their numbers and they had the authority to define doctrine (Acts 15) binding on the whole Church. This is the basic nature of the Catholic Church you spurn and the authority it still bears.
not interested in your games.....
I was hoping to have a serious discussion on Bible verses, but it seems you would rather obfuscate. You don’t seem willing to stay on topic of the sufficiency of the atonement, when I asked about Hebrews 9:12.
The Bible must be interpreted in its proper context. There are times when the context calls for a literal meaning and other times when the context is clearly figurative.
You are confusing the Biblical concepts of justification and santification. Justification or salvation is when a person is considered forgiven for their past, present, and future sin because of their acceptance of Jesus as their savior. Santification is the ongoing process of being conformed to Chris’s image and the continued growth of a Christian through the power of the Holy Spirit.
Scriptures on justification:
Romans 5:1 “Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God because of what Jesus our Lord has done for us.”
Col 2:13-14 “When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.”
Justification means positionally we are declared forgiven having our sin debt paid for us by Christ. We have peace with God and our names are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.
Santification is where the Holy Spirit teaches us to overcome our flesh nature. If we do fall, 1 John 1:9 says, “But if we confess our sins to Him, He is faitful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all wickedness.”
I’d rather not going into hypotheticals, but if you must....only God knows a person’s true heart. I would wager though that a person who is capable of murder is clearly not in tune with the Holy Spirit so it’s likely that they have not been born again. However, if they are truly are one of God’s chosen then the blood of Jesus covers all sins and is capable of forgiving even a murderer. King David was an adulterer and murderer but God forgave him and considered him righteous.
Your premise is incorrect. The verses you cited are not contradicted in scripture because scripture doesn’t contradict itself.
Instead, your understanding of Col 1:24 is not supported by the proper context. I have provided other scriptures, including Hebrews 9:12 which clearly demonstrate the sufficiency of Christ’s atonement to secure our redemption. You still haven’t supplied any explanation as to that verse; rather you have again brought up different topics like the last supper, which have nothing to do with this discussion.
Is this a once for all type of event? When the person says the "sinner's prayer" are his future sins forgiven preemptively?
What you refer to as Justification is a juridical understanding of what can be easily described as our rebirth into the Family of God... our redemption. Your description of Sanctification is another juridical understanding of simply being an active member of God's Family. I thought Protestants said Catholics made things complicated...
King David was an adulterer and murderer but God forgave him and considered him righteous.
He was forgiven and restored as a result of his confession and penance through God's Grace. Now... who follows this model today?
I don’t take stock, necessarily in the sinner’s prayer. Whenever a person comes to the point when they truly believe in their heart and have repented of their sins, then they are adopted into the family of God and positionally declared righteous before God. That could happen during someone saying the sinner’s prayer if that person truly understood what it means to accept Jesus and repent of their sins. From then on, they are part of God’s family, and as Jesus said, no one can snatch them out of His hand.
If a Christian does sin, then they may face earthly consequences, which is God’s way of disciplining them into conforming to His image. That is not to say, though, that each time they sin they have “lost” their redemption and can only reclaim it by confessing that new sin. Their position in Christ is secure because the penalty for their sin was paid for by Christ.
I have taken pains to show my position Biblically... can you please provide a citation for this adoption method?
That is not to say, though, that each time they sin they have “lost” their redemption and can only reclaim it by confessing that new sin.
I've never claimed that and the Church doesn't teach that. On a related note... do you believe in an unforgivable sin?
I have also taken great pains to show my position biblically....I have quoted many verses to reveal what basis I believe from.
Romans 8 is a great chapter that talks about how Christians are adopted into the family of God and have been made right before God because the spirit of Christ lives within them.
I asked the question about “losing” one’s redemption because I’m honestly trying to understand the concept of one not feeling secure in their salvation. I’m truly perplexed by your statement...if you don’t think that a believer needs to confess their sins on an ongoing basis or do good deeds to ensure their salvation then it seems you are supporting a similar position as mine.
Perhaps, the difference is you think that a true believer can fall away to the point where they no longer believe in Jesus and have abandoned the faith completely. If that is our only difference of opinion then I think we really are not that far apart. If a person were to ever get that far away in their faith, then I would leave it up to God to truly judge their heart.
Yes, I believe in unforgivable sin. Jesus, noted that if one blasphemes the Holy Spirit that is unforgivable. Again, I would argue that anyone who is capable of blaspheming the Holy Spirit does not have the Holy Spirit within them so they were lost and have now come to a point where they can’t be forgiven.
Do you also believe that Christ is a wooden gate and we are literal sheep? Baaaaah.
You seem hung up on the command to make disciples and baptize. What about Jesus’ statement that unless one is born again (or born from above) they cannot enter the kingdom of Heaven. You can teach people and baptize them all you want, but unless that person has been born again, they will not enter the kingdom of Heaven.The Roman church believes in baptismal regeneration, where the actual act of sprinkling places one in the body of Christ. Babies are sprinkled and placed in the Body of Christ based on the parents "faith". Adults need to be catechized before baptizm, (not sure why, considering Ex Opere Operato and such).
The Baptism of desire, Baptism of blood and all the other exemptions were postulated for those believers who were saved but not baptized.
Jesus baptized with the Holy Spirit and with Fire, not water. Water is often used as a metaphor for the Holy Spirit.
John 4:13 Jesus answered, “Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, 14 but whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
John 7:37-39 On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink, whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” By this he meant the spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time, the spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
Eph 5:25 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, Offcourse, Christian baptism is the first thing commanded by Jesus for the new believer. We understand it as a symbol of what has already taken place in regeneration and it is also a public identification with Christ. The Roman church does have significant problems with metaphors.
Christ didn't say He was a wooden gate... He said He was the door and it is both metaphor and literal. It is metaphor because He really didn't look like a door (I'm sure the Gospel writers would have mentioned something about his odd features) and literal because no one enters into His Kingdom except through Him. According to www.Dictionary.com... Door: any means of approach, admittance, or access... I'd say that's a good understanding for Christ.
Is He a shepherd and are we His sheep? If we take Him at His Word, He is our Shepherd... and I will gladly be His sheep. Baah.
You seem to have a problem separating metaphor and literal. Christ said He was the Vine and we are the branches. It is a clear way to understand how we can be one with Christ... and yet separate at the same time. We don't lose our individuality in uniting with Him.
Now, let's talk about the real issue... the Eucharist. Christ gave us metaphors to understand our relationship to Him and Him to us. He said He was the door, the vine, and the Shepherd. Each has its significance for us to understand Him. There is only one place in all of the Scripture, though, where Jesus picked up something physical and said, "This is Me" and that is the Eucharist. He didn't do that with the Torah... though He had touched it many times in His life. He did that at the Last Supper to make what was symbolic of the Exodus from Egypt into reality in Him and our Exodus from death into life. God said that they were to celebrate this feast for all time... and we do, through the Mass.
John 6:60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?"
Those who see with the eyes of faith rather than demanding to have all mysteries understood. We walk by faith and not by sight in trusting that what Jesus said would be, will be.
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.