Ping
“...not of works, lest any man boast”.
Fascinating and helpful, too. Thanks for posting!
This guy doesn’t get out much, does he?
The author states the Bible doesn’t mention ‘personal savior”. The Bible also doesn’t mention “Pope”. When he says “The Catholic church is the only true church”, doe she mean catholic, as in universal, or Roman Catholic. There’s so much wrong with the author’s premise, that the whole piece becomes meaningless.
As for the false teachings of “penance”, the Bible says that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness”. So I would much rather put my trust in Jesus Christ, who shed His blood and died in my place, than some religion that tells me that saying Hail Mary’s helps pay for sin.
Frankly, the very idea that this religion teaches about its Pope being next thing to Jesus Himself while the current Poop decrees all sorts of un Godly and un Holy goofiness should be enough for anyone with half a brain to take a REALLY hard look at what that religion says compared to what God says in the actual Bible. Fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, shame on me.
Beware presumption.
“ “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
— John 5:24”
The author repeatedly attacks the term born-again. The fact is that Jesus used that term when speaking with Nicodemus. The Bible doesn't use the term Trinity, yet Christian churches use it all the time to describe Father, Son & Holy Spirit.
Regarding baptism. Are we commanded in scripture to be baptized? Yes. Is it required in scripture for salvation? No. The author conflates these two understandings of baptism.
"Those who believe that baptism is required for salvation are quick to use 1 Peter 3:21 as a “proof text,” because it states “baptism now saves you.” Was Peter really saying that the act of being baptized is what saves us? If he were, he would be contradicting many other passages of Scripture that clearly show people being saved (as evidenced by their receiving the Holy Spirit) prior to being baptized or without being baptized at all. A good example of someone who was saved before being baptized is Cornelius and his household in Acts 10. We know that they were saved before being baptized because they had received the Holy Spirit, which is the evidence of salvation (Romans 8:9; Ephesians 1:13; 1 John 3:24). The evidence of their salvation was the reason Peter allowed them to be baptized. Countless passages of Scripture clearly teach that salvation comes when one believes in the gospel, at which time he or she is sealed “in Christ with the Holy Spirit of promise” (Ephesians 1:13). Thankfully, though, we don’t have to guess at what Peter means in this verse because he clarifies that for us with the phrase “not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience.” While Peter is connecting baptism with salvation, it is not the act of being baptized that he is referring to (not the removal of dirt from the flesh). Being immersed in water does nothing but wash away dirt. What Peter is referring to is what baptism represents, which is what saves us (an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ). In other words, Peter is simply connecting baptism with belief. It is not the getting wet part that saves but the “appeal to God for a clean conscience” which is signified by baptism, that saves us. The appeal to God always comes first. First belief and repentance, then we are baptized to publicly identify ourselves with Christ." - re: https://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-1Peter-3-21.html
Jesus loves you far more than the man-made religion of self-effort.
It is finished.
Jesus promises are the foundation of trust in Him.
An awful lot of people were crucified.
Only One was resurrected. That Resurrection is what we celebrate--not the crucifixion.
Born again is a thing. Once saved, always saved isn’t.
What a heaping pile.
Now isn't that convenient???
Christ came to do away with all that. The Apostle is simply saying that we’re not justified by being Jew but are justified by being Christian.
If salvation is based on "merit," then the chrstian religion isn't necessary. There was already a religion, indisputably from G-d Himself, that had "works" and rituals and ceremonies and laws. The very idea that "faith vs. works" boils down to the old (Biblical) religion vs. the new (post-Biblical) religion is the height of hypocrisy. This argument is essentially Protestant and chrstianity brought Protestantism on itself by fulminating against G-d given laws while insisting on man-made laws.
Just desserts.
There is good reason this discussion continues after centuries of debate referring to the same source. Reformers claim that Jesus Paid it All, and it’s insulting to Him to say otherwise. The Eastern and Roman traditions claim we need to stay in the orthodox/apostolic communion and work it out with fear and trembling. Both are supported in the Book, too.
Quote
The Catholic Church is the One Institution of Faith established by Christ, outside of which there is no salvation. The Church is the unwritten word of God while the Bible is the written word, but both are of equal authority and must be accepted by the faithful. St. Paul himself says:
......
Paul says:
Christ, our Passover Lamb.
Unleavened Bread of Sincerity and Truth
First Fruits of those fallen asleep
The Catholic Church has substituted those with three days with three of their own,in contrast to Paul’s first importance of the gospel, leading to a False Christ and a False Gospel
The writer should worry about the False Security in False religion with a Fase Christ and False Gospel.
And hope that’s not a salvation issue..
This doesn’t need a long answer. Just read John, Romans and Galatians very slowly.
Let me get this straight. In order to be saved I have to belong to a Church run by a pervert-loving communist who has been shielding child molesters from prosecution?
While I sympathize with the premise of the article, it is riddled with errors.
“Nowhere in the Gospel does Christ prescribe such a thing, nor is the term ‘personal savior’ found anywhere in the Bible.”
Paul, who told us to follow his example, made it personal:
Galatians 2:20 NKJV
I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.
Yes, Jesus died for the whole world, but it is importasnt to realize that He “died for me”. That’s personal.
I agree with the article that the corrupted modern message of salvation tolerates sin and presumes upon the mercy of God. Some of the scriptures cited here are exactly the reason that many “Christians” are headed toward Hell rather than Heaven.
The remedy proposed here uses the strawman of Luther. The Reformation included many leaders who did not fall into the errors which Luther is accused of making. The Reformation produced good works, works of faith, and fruits of salvation which, as the article correctly asserts ARE REQUIRED to inherit eternal life.
However, these outcomes are the result of repentance and faith, BECAUSE God’s grace always and actively works in the believer to produce them.
100% of the time. This is because salvation is ultimately a demonstration of the sovereign power of God.